Bush and the Iraqi Christians; and the problem of hyper-liberal evangelicals
Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media condemns President Bush for his indifference to the persecution of Iraqi Christians that has been unleashed by Bush’s empowerment of Iraqi Muslims. Kincaid also touches on Bush’s support for the founding of a Muslim state in Kosovo.
Let us consider Bush. He’s a “conservative” who betrayed his solemn promise to his conservative supporters by appointing Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court (and then having his wife call them “anti-woman” for protesting this betrayal). He’s an American who passionately seeks to Mexicanize the United States. And he’s a Christian who seeks to advance Muslims and place Christians under their cruel power.
Any way you look at it, it seems that Bush was born to be a traitor. It’s in his blood.
Jacob M. writes:
Apropos of both your criticism of Bush’s support for an independent Muslim Kosovo, and my essay on the liberalism of conservative evangelicals, I happened across a letter from a bunch of evangelical pastors and missionaries to Pat Robertson, urging him to drop his opposition to an independent Kosovo. They seem to think an independent Kosovo would be more fertile ground for spreading the Gospel. Thus, they are aligned with a sworn enemy of Christianity, Europe, and America, against another denomination of Christianity which is admittedly quite foreign to them and to me, but which is Christian and European nonetheless. Notice how they can’t say enough good things about Islamic Kosovo and the Muslims they know: they protect the religious freedom of Protestants more than Orthodox Serbia does, they’re peace-loving and oppose the infamous “tiny minority of extremists,” they even celebrate the Fourth of July! (I was unable to find online any reference to the Kosovo law they mention which allgedly mentions Protestants by name and protects their religious freedom. In fact, all the articles I found about recent religous laws in Kosovo contained complaints by Albanian Protestants and mentioned fears that their religious freedom would be limited.)
Charles T. writes:
There is a peculiar strain of evangelical Christianity which requires one literally to love one’s enemies to the detriment of friends, allies and even family. These people take Jesus’s words to love one’s enemies to an extreme that is illogical. Unfortunately this line of thinking is quite widespread in our evangelical churches and it has turned our Christians into people without spines when faced with evil bent on destroying them.LA replies:
Is there a movement within Evangelical Christianity opposing this hyper-liberalism?Ralph P. writes:
Two brief points concerning this topic. The embrace of multiculturalism by evangelicals may well be tied to their belief that these really are the end times. I don’t remember my Bible well but there is a passage in Revelations about the 144,000 elect being drawn from every race and nation. St. Paul also ran into this thinking. I believe that he admonished the Thessalonians to go back to work at their regular jobs, since they all thought it was going to end and just sat around waiting. If this is the case with the evangelicals it might explain their geographical jockeying as well. They might all be consulting their ancient maps. Someone who knows them well should address this point. If they really believe this then there is no reasoning with them, except to point out what Jesus said and Paul knew, that the end times are known only to God himself.LA replies:
On your latter point, yes. That explains how Bush and his father think. We are children, or peasants. They have to humor us. They have to tell us things they know aren’t true to get us to behave. But once they have us in their power, then they will do as they wish. That is not treason. That is management.Ben W. writes:
In the “Bush and the Iraqi Christians” thread, there is a sense that evangelicals are working against Christianity, for instance in supporting a Muslim Kosovo. People take this to be a contradiction.LA replies:
Ben’s comment brings out how incorrect and dangerously misleading is the use of the word “conservative” today. If people are conservative on one or two issues, and very liberal on everything else, we call them conservatives. The evanglicals are “conservative” on moral values, and are indifferent to our nation and civilization, yet they are called conservatives. This is just wrong, and leads conservatives to believe that conservatism has a strength it does not have. Conservatism or traditionalism does not have meaning apart from a particular, incarnate tradition to which one belongs or has an allegiance. People who believe only in some pure relationship between the individual and God, and are indiffeent to their actual society, culture, political system, nation, and civilization, are not conservatives but the functional equivalent of gnostic radicals.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 03, 2007 09:33 PM | Send