One flaw this guy doesn't have is being wishy-washy on faith. The history of the last 8 years would be very, very different if that were the case.
Posted on 12/09/2008 2:39:05 PM PST by 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."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.aol.com ...
“Sadly up to a third of evangelical peopole are so uninformed and ignorant of public matters that they voted for their “Bill” in 1996 and Oprah’s Choice in 2008.”
Ummm... no, they voted for Bush.
6:6 I am weary with my groaning; Every night I flood my bed; I drench my couch with my tears.
I don’t think he really flooded the bed every night.
The Catholic churs holds a similar position.
Well said.
Exactly. The answer is "Neither" - but we must understand that Evil loves to drive small wooden wedges in between our fingernails as we hang onto our faith in a such a horrible world.
Satan wants us to believe in this world, and to doubt God. Lucifer can go $%^!&% himself.
Jesus Christ is King.
One day, everyone, EVERYONE will have to bow and say that with their mouths.
How much better it is to join Him now.
Note the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy” — a statement signed on by leading Evangelicals and represents what is referred to as the Bible’s position (and therefore “God’s position”) on this issue...
http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html
Also note the necessary “follow-on” document.... the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics”....
http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago2.html
—
This is what Bush should have referred to, but he probably doesn’t know a thing about it.... LOL...
The idea of a literal or non-literal interpretation of the Bible is a false choice. The Bible is a book of things that are (in every detail) truly and faithfully recorded. Some of those things recorded are cases of peope lying or saying untruths, and some is metaphor or allegory, but all is truly recorded and divinely inspired.
One wonders, for instance, why the Bible has been proved correct over and over by archaeological finds if it’s not a book of real history.
Archaelolical finds do NOT support a worldwide flood as described in Genesis ...
We agree. I understand that God inspired men to write, and that the canon was compiled by men. That is why we must rely on the Holy Spirit to teach us the scripture, because mankind is fallible from the most unbelieving atheist to the pope, not one of us can claim otherwise.
How do you know that? Are you God?
“The Bible is a book of things that are (in every detail) truly and faithfully recorded. “
Says who? Citation, please.
The definition of "literal" is a source of far too much consternation among Christians.
Do I believe that the Bible is literally true? Most definitely. However, one has to make a distinction between literal and literalistic. Jesus said in John 10:7 that he was the door. So is Jesus literally door made out of wood? Of course not.
Bush is not the most articulate president we have ever had. That's okay -- I would take Calvin Coolidge over Obama any day. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he was trying to make a distinction between "literal" and "woodenly literal" but failed in making his point come across.
I haven't agreed with everything that Bush has done. However, on the really important issues -- the sanctity of human life, compassion for the poor, and defending our country -- his faith in shown by his works.
One flaw this guy doesn't have is being wishy-washy on faith. The history of the last 8 years would be very, very different if that were the case.
Jeb’s never going to be President, or even try.
I agree with you but I like the writings of Paul Ricouer which note how we are always confronted in interpretation with a dilemma between: hermeneutic of faith and hermeneutic of suspicion. Our struggles could lead to the lack of faith and hell. Our struggles could also lead us toward heaven.
The hermeneutic of faith recognizes that the debate Paul and Peter were having was a productive one inspired by God— not to destroy either of them— but to lift up all of humanity in a difficult question of grace versus works. This is a timeless question.
In failing to see the value of debates God lays out in his spirit, we close off his unique manner of harvesting within humanity. We need to each speak honestly about what the Bible is saying to us and let God drive the reconciliation process. Ultimately God will judge and we are all the better for that. Rushing the closure of scripture can only end up placing the Bible prematurely on the shelf to gather dust.
What does it all mean? I am still interested in finding out— by faith.
“Do you really take the Bible literally and believe that God did not know that man needed a woman instead of a salamander for a mate?”
You start with a misunderstanding about how to read the scriptures (a bit surprising for one named E=MC2, but so it goes...) In Genesis after God’s statement pronouncing “It is not good that the man should be alone...” it then goes on to point out the other animals that God created (while also indicating Adam as a thinking, speaking, rational creature—how quickly he evolved—we’re still in the Garden!) to reveal exactly that none of the other animals were a suitable helpmate for him.
When the scriptures are read we can presume to know more than what is revealed in its pages, or we can humbly seek to learn of the One who would deign to reveal Himself to those of this fallen world. We all must choose how we come to them...the day will come when our choice will be over, the knee will bend, and the tongue will confess.
At present, we handle/mishandle scripture based on our sincerity/insincerity to draw near to the Author.
He believes Islam is a religion of peace. That’s enough for me.
Part of the statement from the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (referenced up above)...
A Short Statement
1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God’s witness to Himself.
2. Holy Scripture, being God’s own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God’s command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God’s pledge, in all that it promises.
3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture’s divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.
4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives.
5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible’s own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church.
—
Articles of Affirmation and Denial
Article I.
WE AFFIRM that the Holy Scriptures are to be received as the authoritative Word of God.
WE DENY that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church, tradition, or any other human source.
—
Article II.
WE AFFIRM that the Scriptures are the supreme written norm by which God binds the conscience, and that the authority of the Church is subordinate to that of Scripture.
WE DENY that Church creeds, councils, or declarations have authority greater than or equal to the authority of the Bible.
—
Article III.
WE AFFIRM that the written Word in its entirety is revelation given by God.
WE DENY that the Bible is merely a witness to revelation, or only becomes revelation in encounter, or depends on the responses of men for its validity.
—
Article IV.
WE AFFIRM that God who made mankind in His image has used language as a means of revelation.
WE DENY that human language is so limited by our creatureliness that it is rendered inadequate as a vehicle for divine revelation. We further deny that the corruption of human culture and language through sin has thwarted God’s work of inspiration.
—
Article V.
WE AFFIRM that God’s revelation within the Holy Scriptures was progressive.
WE DENY that later revelation, which may fulfill earlier revelation, ever corrects or contradicts it. We further deny that any normative revelation has been given since the completion of the New Testament writings.
—
Article VI.
WE AFFIRM that the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the original, were given by divine inspiration.
WE DENY that the inspiration of Scripture can rightly be affirmed of the whole without the parts, or of some parts but not the whole.
—
Article VII.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration was the work in which God by His Spirit, through human writers, gave us His Word. The origin of Scripture is divine. The mode of divine inspiration remains largely a mystery to us.
WE DENY that inspiration can be reduced to human insight, or to heightened states of consciousness of any kind.
—
Article VIII.
WE AFFIRM that God in His work of inspiration utilized the distinctive personalities and literary styles of the writers whom He had chosen and prepared.
WE DENY that God, in causing these writers to use the very words that He chose, overrode their personalities.
—
Article IX.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration, though not conferring omniscience, guaranteed true and trustworthy utterance on all matters of which the Biblical authors were moved to speak and write.
WE DENY that the finitude or fallenness of these writers, by necessity or otherwise, introduced distortion or falsehood into God’s Word.
—
Article X.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.
WE DENY that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.
—
Article XI.
WE AFFIRM that Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses.
WE DENY that it is possible for the Bible to be at the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and inerrancy may be distinguished, but not separated.
—
Article XII.
WE AFFIRM that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
WE DENY that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.
—
Article XIII.
WE AFFIRM the propriety of using inerrancy as a theological term with reference to the complete truthfulness of Scripture.
WE DENY that it is proper to evaluate Scripture according to standards of truth and error that are alien to its usage or purpose. We further deny that inerrancy is negated by Biblical phenomena such as a lack of modern technical precision, irregularities of grammar or spelling, observational descriptions of nature, the reporting of falsehoods, the use of hyperbole and round numbers, the topical arrangement of material, variant selections of material in parallel accounts, or the use of free citations.
—
Article XIV.
WE AFFIRM the unity and internal consistency of Scripture.
WE DENY that alleged errors and discrepancies that have not yet been resolved vitiate the truth claims of the Bible.
—
Article XV.
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy is grounded in the teaching of the Bible about inspiration.
WE DENY that Jesus’ teaching about Scripture may be dismissed by appeals to accommodation or to any natural limitation of His humanity.
—
Article XVI.
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy has been integral to the Church’s faith throughout its history.
WE DENY that inerrancy is a doctrine invented by scholastic Protestantism, or is a reactionary position postulated in response to negative higher criticism.
—
Article XVII.
WE AFFIRM that the Holy Spirit bears witness to the Scriptures, assuring believers of the truthfulness of God’s written Word.
WE DENY that this witness of the Holy Spirit operates in isolation from or against Scripture.
—
Article XVIII.
WE AFFIRM that the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-historical exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any treatment of the text or quest for sources lying behind it that leads to relativizing, dehistoricizing, or discounting its teaching, or rejecting its claims to authorship.
—
Article XIX.
WE AFFIRM that a confession of the full authority, infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound understanding of the whole of the Christian faith. We further affirm that such confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of Christ.
WE DENY that such confession is necessary for salvation. However, we further deny that inerrancy can be rejected without grave consequences, both to the individual and to the Church.
There is more at the links given up above...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.