Does the bible directly shape US foreign policy?

[Matty1973]

I was reading this article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article7078640.ece) and was quite shocked by this paragraph:


More worrying, the Republican embrace of Israel is fuelled in large part by the evangelical base, many of whom see the influx of Jews into the West Bank as a prerequisite for the doomsday scenario of End Times. If you want to hear what evangelical America thinks, ask Sarah Palin. “I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is going to grow,” she said. “More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don’t think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand.”


Was Bush similarly influenced? Do evangelicals look forward to 'End Times'?

[Doctor Evil]

Was Bush similarly influenced? Do evangelicals look forward to 'End Times'?

No. You may be able to find some people with such weird beliefs. But I have not seen any evidence that they influenced US policy. In fact, all US administrations had the same positions regarding settlements. The most you can say about the Bush administration is that they promised to support territory exchanges that would keep some of the settlement blocks in Israel. (In return to the Israeli withdraw from Gaza, and the removal of four west bank settlements.) However, this was supposed to happen in a final peace deal, and Israel was supposed to compensate the Palestinians with land.

Bush middle east policy was based the usual politics. For instance, prior to 9/11 the administration considered the whole thing to be a hopeless mess, and so their policy was to ignore it as much as possible. (It was probably a mess, following the failure of the Camp David summit.) It is not difficult to explain also the changes in the Bush administration policies. I will do that if you are interested.

To summarise, they claim in the OP is exaggerated. Some people may believe that. In fact, I have met a few. But their beliefs have little to do with the policies of governments.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I was reading this article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article7078640.ece) and was quite shocked by this paragraph:



Was Bush similarly influenced? Do evangelicals look forward to 'End Times'?I differ with Dr Evil here. I think there is evidence Bush was at least influenced by the end times beliefs even if he wasn't a strong believer in the claim.

However, everyone in the Bush admin and the US military are not Evangelicals and they don't have overwhelming power in our government. Now they have even less. I doubt they were ever in the majority, but I wouldn't want to underestimate or rule out their influence entirely.

[Ziggurat]

I was reading this article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article7078640.ece) and was quite shocked by this paragraph:


Funny, but the actual quote from Palin says nothing about end times or the bible. You really need to find a better source than excitable Andy. Especially about Palin. I've never seen a gay man so obsessed with a woman's vagina (not in this story, but in plenty of others).

[MG1962]

I just dont see. Bush could have triggered the events any time he wanted. He didn't, plain and simple. Obama is trying a different approach to the last 5 or so presidents I can think of

[Skeptic Ginger]

I just dont see. Bush could have triggered the events any time he wanted. He didn't, plain and simple. Obama is trying a different approach to the last 5 or so presidents I can think of
I don't think you can say that Bush not taking [X] action meant he didn't believe in the end times or believe that God might use him to initiate the events.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Funny, but the actual quote from Palin says nothing about end times or the bible. You really need to find a better source than excitable Andy. Especially about Palin. I've never seen a gay man so obsessed with a woman's vagina (not in this story, but in plenty of others).Oh boy, another pissing contest with Zig that I'm sure to win. ;)

Here's the paragraph in question:the Republican embrace of Israel is fuelled in large part by the evangelical base, many of whom see the influx of Jews into the West Bank as a prerequisite for the doomsday scenario of End Times. If you want to hear what evangelical America thinks, ask Sarah Palin. “I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is going to grow,” she said. “More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don’t think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand.”Maybe there isn't a statement here that Palin believes she, rather than Bush, has been chosen by God to initiate the End Times. I doubt either of them had that detailed of a belief about starting a war between Israel and its enemies.

But there is plenty of evidence both Bush and Pain are sincere believers in the Evangelical version of Christianity. Within that religion is the belief about what is going to happen in the future. I would hope they are wise enough to refrain from acting on any conclusion the End Times are here or that the times can be brought about by pushing Israel into a war.

However, you would be hard pressed to say these beliefs did not influence how Bush, Palin, and many in the Republic* Party view Israel and the US's role in supporting Israel regardless of how horribly they oppress the Palestinians.

It's my belief Israel is its own worst enemy. If they would recognize you cannot oppress a population into submission, it goes against human nature, things might eventually change. But that is not likely to happen because Israel is not interested in giving up water and land rights.

Maybe, however, if we have a President who recognizes you have to separate the perpetrators of the violence from the rest of the population, and, you cannot punish the whole population and expect to quit creating new terrorists, we at least won't be part of the problem. Bush and Palin, viewing Israel as part of God's plan, would be seriously influenced by that version of reality.

[MG1962]

I don't think you can say that Bush not taking [X] action meant he didn't believe in the end times or believe that God might use him to initiate the events.

But you well know I cant prove a negative. All I have to work with are his actions. And in my mind they dont point to any belief in end times or what part he was going to play in them.

Regardless of opinion, most Christians who follow the trend towards the end times agree that a major component is the building of the third temple. That has not happened. So even if Bush truely believed he was to be the one. The lack of a temple is problamatic.

[Skeptic Ginger]

But you well know I cant prove a negative. All I have to work with are his actions. And in my mind they dont point to any belief in end times or what part he was going to play in them.

Regardless of opinion, most Christians who follow the trend towards the end times agree that a major component is the building of the third temple. That has not happened. So even if Bush truely believed he was to be the one. The lack of a temple is problamatic.I'm not asking you to prove any negatives. I'm saying your conclusion is not supported by the evidence you cite.

Bush has said he believes the Evangelical dogma. His charitable donations went to a church that uses donations mostly to proselytize. He verbalized his beliefs on a regular basis, he added lots of religion to the Federal government like creating a faith based web page on every department web site and so on.

I think there is more than sufficient evidence both Palin and Bush believe the Biblical prediction of the End Times as is in Evangelical dogma. Whether either of them believes the end times are near is another matter. But one cannot ignore how these two people's beliefs might influence Mid-East policies if/when they are in a position to affect those policies.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I remember seeing a Reagan quote about his beliefs about End Times and Israel, and I thought it was chilling. Anyone know what I'm talking about? (I'm sorry, I can't remember where I saw it or exactly what it said, but I think it said that he believed the End was coming in his lifetime and that it would be kicked off by a massive war in the Mideast.)

Now, whether or not his belief influenced any policy decisions is another issue, I suppose.

ETA: Apparently my memory isn't so great. I just found this:


In one of the most peculiar twists of the 1984 campaign, St. John's apocalyptic vision of the "End Times" emerged last week as a political issue. During the final presidential debate, Panelist Marvin Kalb of NBC asked Ronald Reagan, "Do you feel that we are now heading, perhaps, for some kind of nuclear Armageddon?" While Nancy Reagan gasped, "Oh, no!" to companions, the President answered that, yes, he had chatted with people about "the biblical prophecies of what would portend the coming of Armageddon and so forth, and the fact that a number of theologians for the last decade or more have believed that this was true, that the prophecies are coming together that portend that." But, he added soothingly, "no one knows whether those prophecies mean that Armageddon is a thousand years away or day after tomorrow. So I have never seriously warned and said we must plan according to Armageddon."

So he believed in the End Times, but not necessarily coming right away (though I wonder if he said otherwise to other audiences).


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,954482,00.html

[JoeTheJuggler]

Sorry to stack on, but I found this on my favorite collection of doomsday prophecies (http://www.abhota.info/endsoon.htm):

Ronald Reagan, in a 1980 interview with Jim Bakker, said, "We may be the generation that sees Armageddon." Before that, in 1971, Reagan commented to James Mills regarding events in Libya, "For the first time ever, everything is in place for the Battle of Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ." Obviously, Reagan thought that the end would come SOON! And to think that a man with apocalyptic delusions like this had his finger on the nuclear button for 8 years. (Grosso p.8)

This may have been the original quote I was thinking of.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Regardless of opinion, most Christians who follow the trend towards the end times agree that a major component is the building of the third temple. That has not happened. So even if Bush truely believed he was to be the one. The lack of a temple is problamatic.

Really? You think people with such delusions can't explain away something like that? I think the most common theme espoused by believers in End Times prophecies is that the end is coming soon, and logic has nothing to do with it.

Read through the history of doomsday predictions (http://www.abhota.info/), and I think you'll find there is no rationality to them at all.

[Doctor Evil]

I think there is more than sufficient evidence both Palin and Bush believe the Biblical prediction of the End Times as is in Evangelical dogma. Whether either of them believes the end times are near is another matter. But one cannot ignore how these two people's beliefs might influence Mid-East policies if/when they are in a position to affect those policies.

Bush was president for eight years. What, in your opinion where the steps he have taken which were influenced by such beliefs? Can you make a case?

[Ziggurat]

But there is plenty of evidence both Bush and Pain are sincere believers in the Evangelical version of Christianity. Within that religion is the belief about what is going to happen in the future.

Look, I don't give a damn what you think about Palin. You've clearly made up your mind. But whatever other evidence you might think exists to confirm your opinion, the fact remains that the quote that Sullivan put in that quote doesn't support his claim.

However, you would be hard pressed to say these beliefs did not influence how Bush, Palin, and many in the Republic* Party view Israel and the US's role in supporting Israel regardless of how horribly they oppress the Palestinians.

Evidently someone doesn't understand that the burden of proof rests on the person making the claim. I don't have to prove that such beliefs didn't influence Bush, Palin, or anyone else, because I didn't make that claim. Sullivan made the claim that such beliefs DID influence them, and he didn't provide evidence of that. Nothing you've said even suggests otherwise. Logic fail, skeptic ginger. In fact, even if proof positive existed elsewhere that his claim was correct, the quote in question still doesn't back up Sullivan's claim.

It's my belief Israel is its own worst enemy.

That's nice, skeptic ginger. But this thread isn't about Israel, and my post wasn't about Israel. Go start your own thread if you want a soap box to rant about how terrible it is.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Bush was president for eight years. What, in your opinion where the steps he have taken which were influenced by such beliefs? Can you make a case?Jerry Falwell, a great proselytizer of the Rapture and the End Times spoke often of supporting Israel unconditionally because the war between Israel and their cultural enemies would be the sign the End Times had begun.

I don't know if that influenced Bush more than the political benefit of supporting Israel alone (because the Israeli's have a tremendous lobby machine), but I have read Bush's unconditional support for Israel was in keeping with his religious beliefs about the End Times.

It's hard for any US politician to go up against any Israeli policies that are not helpful to the peace process, so sorting out what caused which decision is not possible. But it is really unlikely that a US President would go against Israeli policies if that President had both the Israeli lobby and the End Times beliefs to deal with together.

I'll see if I can dig up anything more specific when I have more time. I'm not saying this was some major driving force for Bush. His unfortunate use of language such as "Crusade" was the result of his ignorant religious beliefs. And his religious beliefs were, in my opinion, very destructive when it came to breaking down the policy of separation of church and state.

I'm not one claiming Bush was actively trying to bring on the End Times. I think it is more likely he might have made a bad rash decision about escalating the MidEast wars given the right circumstances, and he might have made that rash decision believing it fit with the advice he imagined he got from his "higher father". But I didn't see Bush out there actively trying to make things worse than he made them by invading Iraq.

[MG1962]

I'm not asking you to prove any negatives. I'm saying your conclusion is not supported by the evidence you cite.

Bush has said he believes the Evangelical dogma. His charitable donations went to a church that uses donations mostly to proselytize. He verbalized his beliefs on a regular basis, he added lots of religion to the Federal government like creating a faith based web page on every department web site and so on.

I think there is more than sufficient evidence both Palin and Bush believe the Biblical prediction of the End Times as is in Evangelical dogma. Whether either of them believes the end times are near is another matter. But one cannot ignore how these two people's beliefs might influence Mid-East policies if/when they are in a position to affect those policies.

Then we will agree to disagree

[MG1962]

Really? You think people with such delusions can't explain away something like that? I think the most common theme espoused by believers in End Times prophecies is that the end is coming soon, and logic has nothing to do with it.

Read through the history of doomsday predictions (http://www.abhota.info/), and I think you'll find there is no rationality to them at all.

This topic is dealing specifically with the battle of Armageddon

[Doctor Evil]

Jerry Falwell, a great proselytizer of the Rapture and the End Times spoke often of supporting Israel unconditionally because the war between Israel and their cultural enemies would be the sign the End Times had begun.


So? How this is supposed to be related to US policies?

[dafydd]

I remember George Bush senior saying this.
“No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God.”

[Skeptic Ginger]

So? How this is supposed to be related to US policies?Falwell was the spokesperson for the Evangelical group which had a large influence on Bush.

Are you familiar with the Regency Law School scandal, for example? Bush fired over 150 qualified experienced lawyers in the DoJ and replaced them with religious ideologues who were inexperienced graduates from the unaccredited law school which Jerry Falwell ran along with the rest of the university, Liberty University.

[ponderingturtle]

No. You may be able to find some people with such weird beliefs. But I have not seen any evidence that they influenced US policy. In fact, all US administrations had the same positions regarding settlements. The most you can say about the Bush administration is that they promised to support territory exchanges that would keep some of the settlement blocks in Israel. (In return to the Israeli withdraw from Gaza, and the removal of four west bank settlements.) However, this was supposed to happen in a final peace deal, and Israel was supposed to compensate the Palestinians with land.

And a lot of money for those settlements does come from america, and specifically evangelical christians.

Bush middle east policy was based the usual politics. For instance, prior to 9/11 the administration considered the whole thing to be a hopeless mess, and so their policy was to ignore it as much as possible. (It was probably a mess, following the failure of the Camp David summit.) It is not difficult to explain also the changes in the Bush administration policies. I will do that if you are interested.

I seem to remember something about a Roadmap, sure it detoured into crazyville but Bush was a part of that.

[ponderingturtle]

Look, I don't give a damn what you think about Palin. You've clearly made up your mind. But whatever other evidence you might think exists to confirm your opinion, the fact remains that the quote that Sullivan put in that quote doesn't support his claim.

Well she makes a claim that seems to have no real basis in evidence, but if she draws her claim from religious dogma that would support it is open to question. My understanding of the demographics of the area has the jewish population is that it is not expanding as fast as others. So she seems to think that there will be some new massive emigration of jews to the area. That would seem to fit with prophecies better than the real world.

I think the effect this has had on policy is real, but not necessarily as direct as it is claimed.

[DC]

I remember George Bush senior saying this.
“No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God.”


and then they elect someone that even mention Atheists in his inaguration speech :)

[Doctor Evil]

Falwell was the spokesperson for the Evangelical group which had a large influence on Bush.

Are you familiar with the Regency Law School scandal, for example? Bush fired over 150 qualified experienced lawyers in the DoJ and replaced them with religious ideologues who were inexperienced graduates from the unaccredited law school which Jerry Falwell ran along with the rest of the university, Liberty University.

So your evidence is that Bush knows someone with such beliefs, instead of evidence that his policies were designed to promote such beliefs. That is not really impressive.

How about looking at the actual policies? The Bush administration had four different approaches to the I/P conflict in its eight years. As far as I can see the changes between approach were related to events, not to some preconceived religious belief. Furthermore, all of these approaches were never consistent with the policy of someone who wishes to bring the end of the world. We can discuss this if anyone is interested. (By the way, I am not implying that all of these approaches were free from mistakes. Far from it.)

So it is seems to me this kind of claim is not only unsupported. It is factually wrong. It also serves as an excuse to avoid discussing the actual policies.

[Doctor Evil]

And a lot of money for those settlements does come from america, and specifically evangelical christians.

Which is irrelevant to the subject of discussion, which is the policies of the US administration.


I seem to remember something about a Roadmap, sure it detoured into crazyville but Bush was a part of that.
Do you even know what was in the roadmap? Are you going to make a case that it was design to bring Armageddon? Or it was supposed to stabilize the situation and bring us closer to another round of peace talks?

[Ziggurat]

Well she makes a claim that seems to have no real basis in evidence,

Really? How would you know? Have you tried to find out about immigration to Israel?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1138110.html

but if she draws her claim from religious dogma that would support it is open to question.

That's a crap defense. It isn't enough to say Sullivan's hypothesis is not inconsistent with the quote. The quote must actually support the point he's trying to make. And it doesn't.

My understanding of the demographics of the area has the jewish population is that it is not expanding as fast as others.

Um... that's actually irrelevant.

[Skeptic Ginger]

So your evidence is that Bush knows someone with such beliefs, instead of evidence that his policies were designed to promote such beliefs. That is not really impressive.

How about looking at the actual policies? The Bush administration had four different approaches to the I/P conflict in its eight years. As far as I can see the changes between approach were related to events, not to some preconceived religious belief. Furthermore, all of these approaches were never consistent with the policy of someone who wishes to bring the end of the world. We can discuss this if anyone is interested. (By the way, I am not implying that all of these approaches were free from mistakes. Far from it.)

So it is seems to me this kind of claim is not only unsupported. It is factually wrong. It also serves as an excuse to avoid discussing the actual policies.Did you ignore my whole post and just make up your own???????????


You seem to have missed this part: "Are you familiar with the Regency Law School scandal, for example? Bush fired over 150 qualified experienced lawyers in the DoJ and replaced them with religious ideologues who were inexperienced graduates from the unaccredited law school which Jerry Falwell ran along with the rest of the university, Liberty University."

How is filling the DoJ with religious ideologues not "evidence that [Bush's] policies were designed to promote such beliefs"

[ponderingturtle]

Which is irrelevant to the subject of discussion, which is the policies of the US administration.

And why shouldn't strong political groups in the US have some effect on foreign policy? It is rather like how Cubans in America are very responsible for policy is made about Cuba.


Do you even know what was in the roadmap? Are you going to make a case that it was design to bring Armageddon? Or it was supposed to stabilize the situation and bring us closer to another round of peace talks?

Oh goalpost moving. The original post was about how Bush ignored the middle east, so now when shown to be an incorrect statement it is being revised.

[Doctor Evil]

And why shouldn't strong political groups in the US have some effect on foreign policy? It is rather like how Cubans in America are very responsible for policy is made about Cuba.


And? People's opinions may change policy. But this is hardly the issue. The op asks whether belief in and times have influenced US policy. If you think this is so, make a case.

Now, stating that it is possible does not count as much of a case. Identifying specific policies driven by this goal would. So, which policies were driven by this goal?


Oh goalpost moving. The original post was about how Bush ignored the middle east, so now when shown to be an incorrect statement it is being revised.

Actually no. The original post was about how belief in end times may influence policy. I am still waiting for evidence on that. As I mentioned earlier, the Bush team initially ignored the middle east, but this had nothing to do with belief in end times. I had also stated, twice, that this was only their initial policy.

[Doctor Evil]

Did you ignore my whole post and just make up your own???????????


You seem to have missed this part: "Are you familiar with the Regency Law School scandal, for example? Bush fired over 150 qualified experienced lawyers in the DoJ and replaced them with religious ideologues who were inexperienced graduates from the unaccredited law school which Jerry Falwell ran along with the rest of the university, Liberty University."

How is filling the DoJ with religious ideologues not "evidence that [Bush's] policies were designed to promote such beliefs"

Lets see.

I do not know whether said people were religious ideologies. Can you make the case for that.

But as it happens this is completely irrelevant, since the relevant middle east policies are determined by the white house and state department.

I will repeat, can you make a case that the US middle east policies had the goal of bringing end times. If so, which policies. Do not change the subject.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Lets see.

I do not know whether said people were religious ideologies. Can you make the case for that.You may want to bring yourself up to speed here on this old news.

Scandal puts spotlight on Christian law school - Grads influential in Justice Dept. (http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2007/04/08/scandal_puts_spotlight_on_christian_law_school/)Regent has had no better friend than the Bush administration. Graduates of the law school have been among the most influential of the more than 150 Regent University alumni hired to federal government positions since President Bush took office in 2001, according to a university website.

One of those graduates is Monica Goodling , the former top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who is at the center of the storm over the firing of US attorneys. Goodling, who resigned on Friday, has become the face of Regent overnight -- and drawn a harsh spotlight to the administration's hiring of officials educated at smaller, conservative schools with sometimes marginal academic reputations.

Documents show that Goodling, who has asserted her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid testifying before Congress, was one of a handful of officials overseeing the firings. She helped install Timothy Griffin , the Karl Rove aide and her former boss at the Republican National Committee, as a replacement US attorney in Arkansas.



Correction: I've been saying the Law School was Falwell's when it was Pat Robertson's. Falwell did found Liberty University (http://www.liberty.edu/) which has a law school and is in Lynchburg, Virginia. Regent Law School (http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/admissions/abouthome.cfm) is in Virginia Beach. Guess I have my Evangelicals blurred.




But as it happens this is completely irrelevant, since the relevant middle east policies are determined by the white house and state department.

I will repeat, can you make a case that the US middle east policies had the goal of bringing end times. If so, which policies. Do not change the subject.I told you, I wasn't making that case. I merely said Bush was a believer in a religion whose dogma includes end times beliefs and it is no secret his religious beliefs influenced many of his Presidential decisions. More specific than that, I have not made such claims.

[stilicho]

I remember George Bush senior saying this.
“No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God.”

That quote was invented by some guy in Chicago. He admits freely that there is no corroboration that the words were ever said or that the questions said to elicit them were ever spoken.

Fail.

[stilicho]

I merely said Bush was a believer in a religion whose dogma includes end times beliefs and it is no secret his religious beliefs influenced many of his Presidential decisions. More specific than that, I have not made such claims.

Isn't your current president a believer in a religion whose dogma includes end times beliefs?

Name one presidential decision that has ever been influenced purely by religious beliefs instead of by combined political and economic reasons. If you can't come up with any then Jesus will start eating babies again.