Why Theology Counts

[COMMENT:  Theology is today considered a very optional extra --  like a cup of tea, if you like that kind of thing.  

That is a terribly mistaken view, held in practice if not in principle, by most Christians, including pastors.  Most pastors have no idea on how to make theology relevant to anything in the public arena today.  However, the press of paganism upon us does seem to be waking some Christians up.  

The discussion below with President Bush, who is well known for being a praying Christian, illustrates the dangers of having leaders who are theologically inept.  Bush came to his faith, apparently, in mid-life.  Whether he had any formal religious training, I do not know.  He seems to favor a kind of popular, "down home" kind of religion, not in need of theological expertise.   (Well, the experts have not served us well....  Look at the mess we are in.)

The first and primary task of civil government is to discern the will of God.  That is true because God is the sovereign over all things, King of kings and Lord of lords.   That means that there is one and only one government in the universe, the government of God.  All other government gains its legitimacy only by being under the authority of God.   Governments not under the authority of God are, by ignorance or rebellion, outlaw governments.  (See Constitution Library, "Biblical Government" section.)

In a universe with no Creator God, there would be no moral order, and thus no legitimate civil government.  All governing would be by manipulation and coercion -- precisely what dominates most of world history. 

Those are strange (and harsh) words to modernist and post-modernist ears, but my words would have been greeted with a "ho hum" by our founding fathers, who knew that already.  "So, what's new?"  We have come a long way, baby, since then.  Downhill into moral, and therefore also political, chaos.  All politics is based on morality, and the only possible basis for morality is the law of God.  

Bush below demonstrates his naiveté in theological matters, a naiveté which will bring severe and dangerous repercussions to America, especially if he is reelected. 

Your attention is directed to the candidacy of Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party for a more complete understanding of the relation between theology and civil government. 

Comments are inserted below [in brackets].   E. Fox.]

 

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:32:14 -0400
Subject: GOOD MORNING AMERICA -- Bush endorses homosexual civil unions, universal salvation 

GOOD MORNING AMERICA
New York, New York
October 26, 2004
 

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW
 
CHARLES GIBSON, ABC NEWS
All right. Thanks, Tony. We're gonna turn again now to our exclusive interview with President George W. Bush.  Everybody knows it's now one of the tightest presidential races ever. And over the weekend, I had some time to spend with the president and the first lady at their ranch down in Crawford, Texas. And we covered a wide range of personal, sensitive subjects, including religion and their views of homosexuality.
-----------------------------

CHARLES GIBSON
I want to ask you about one social issue, 'cause you gave an answer that I thought was really interesting in the third debate. Bob Schieffer asked you if you thought homosexuals were born that way ...
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, UNITED STATES
Yeah.
CHARLES GIBSON
... or became that way. And you said you didn't know.
 
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Right. I don't.

[The evidence is clear, despite all the muddiness in the debate, that homosexuality is not, and cannot be, in any determinative manner, genetically or biologically caused.  I have collected the evidence in Homosexuality: Good & Right in the Eyes of God?  See also the Homosexuality Library.  It is inexcusable that George Bush would not have a reasonable and educated opinion on this matter which is raging through America.  I, and many others, who are intimately engaged in the matter, have written to him.  To my knowledge, he has not invited anyone from "our side" to help even up the sides for this debate.]

CHARLES GIBSON
So, the possibility, it's a nature-nurture argument. So, the possibility exists in your mind that it could be nature.
 
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Sure.
CHARLES GIBSON
They could be born that way. If that's the case, just for sake of argument, that's an unalterable characteristic for them. That's like being black or being a woman. So, how can we deny them rights in any way to a civil union that would allow, give them the same economic rights or health rights or other things?

[Whether or not homosexuality is a given state, genetically or biologically caused, it does not follow at all that it is either a good idea, or that it is morally right.  Those are different questions which need to be addressed on their own.  But the public very much "feels sorry for" those who cannot help their behavior.  There is no such thing as a behavior as complicated as sexuality which is directly caused by biology or genetics.  Biology and genes give us the capacity for such behavior, not the behavior itself.  Homosexuality, the evidence shows, is a compulsive, lethal addiction.]

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
I don't think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that's when a state chooses to do so.

[What on earth is a "civil union"?  A contract?  And what has that to do with homosexuality?  The point of homosexuality is the pleasure and comfort attained in sexual engagement.  To legalize that into a civil union makes no more sense than for fornication, prostitution, etc. 

There are two primary questions:  1. Does God approve?   2.  Is homosexual behavior health promoting or health destroying?   Bush is naively (I suppose) unaware of what homosexual behavior in fact is, and so he cannot be much aware of the horrendous health consequences.   That ignorance is inexcusable for a man in his position because the evidence on the issues are easily available for anyone with a bit of common sense.]

CHARLES GIBSON
But the (Republican Party) platform opposes it.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Well, I don't. I view the definition of marriage different from legal arrangements that enable people to have rights. And I strongly believe that marriage ought to be defined as between, a union between a man and a woman.

[What does that second sentence mean?  Bush ought to know, if he has read the Declaration of Independence, that our rights come from God, not from civil government legal arrangements.   Why does he believe the third sentence? and, assuming it is true, why does he allow the exception for the second?]

CHARLES GIBSON
So, the Republican platform on that point, as far as you're concerned, is wrong?
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Right.
 
CHARLES GIBSON
How about the constitutional amendment on marriage?
LAURA BUSH, FIRST LADY
Well, I think it gives the United States a chance to debate the issue. I think it's an issue that people want to talk about. But with respect to everyone involved, and with respect to people.
 
CHARLES GIBSON
Do you agree with him on the constitutional amendment?
LAURA BUSH
I'm not really sure about it. I think it's important to have the debate.
 
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Look, if, if you're, if you're interested in preserving marriage as a union between a man and a woman, there is one way to do so without the courts making the decisions, that's through the constitutional process.

[That is not the case.  See my article on the matter.]

CHARLES GIBSON
Do we all worship the same God, Christian and Muslim?
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
I think we do.

[The Muslim and the Christian deities are not at all the same beings.  Neither is the Christian deity anything at all like the deities of the Hindu or Buddhist religions.  Bush is simply ignorant and over his head.  A man who has so little knowledge of theology should not be the political leader of anything.  His ignorance of Islamic history is skewing his relationship with Christians and with Muslims as well.  He is unable to helpfully speak the truth to the world, and may find himself in a bigger war than he ever expected.  (See Islam Library.)]

CHARLES GIBSON
Do Christians and non-Christians and Muslims go to heaven in your mind?
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Yes, they do.
We have different routes of getting there. But I will, I, I want you to understand, I want your listeners to understand, I don't get to decide who goes to heaven. The almighty God decides who goes to heaven. And I am on my personal walk.

[He asserts that positively.  How does he know?  How would we go about knowing?

On the Biblical view, there will be many persons in heaven who never on earth knew Jesus.   St. Augustine said that the Church has many that God does not, and God has many that the Church does not.   But Hindus and Muslims will not be in heaven because of their views of God, which are very contradictory to the Judeo-Christian view.  They will be in heaven because they, in their hearts, want what God is offering.  That is the message of the Last Judgement scene in Matthew 25:31 ff.

The kind of irresponsible naiveté illustrated by Bush is dangerous at the level of power which he wields.  Theology counts.] 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Go to: => TOP Page; => Politics Library; => Apologetics Library; => ROAD MAP