John McCain rejects endorsement of radical cleric John Hagee

[USA4ME]

written by James Toranto

Supporters of Barack Obama had pointed to Hagee in an effort to defuse the controversy over Obama's relationship with Jeremiah "God Damn America" Wright, and McCain alluded to this in renouncing Hagee's endorsement:

McCain tried Thursday to draw a distinction between the Obama-Wright connection and his own relationships with Parsley and Hagee, saying Hagee was not his pastor.

"My church I attend is North Phoenix Baptist Church; my pastor and spiritual guide is Pastor Dan Yeary," McCain said. "I've never been to Pastor Hagee's church or Pastor Parsley's church. I didn't attend their church for 20 years. I'm not a member of their church."

We would draw another distinction here. Hagee's statement about Hitler strikes us as bizarre too. Surely an omniscient and benevolent God would have come up with a better way than Hitler of helping Jews get back to Israel. But this is in the realm of theology, something that does not worry us, a religious nonbeliever, overmuch. Politically, as far as we know, Hagee is strongly pro-Israel, a position with which we are comfortable.

Wright, by contrast, has political views that we find invidious, regardless of his claimed religious justification for them. If Obama's spiritual mentor were an atheist or a Muslim who said "Death to America" instead of a Christian who says "God damn America," it would bother us just as much.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121156305470417803.html?mod=Best+of+the+Web+Today

.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

We can perhaps agree that he's not first-class material.

But he hasn't called for the chopping-off of heads.

Why use a euphemism to describe John Hagee? The guy is scum and no one should have any qualms about saying so.

Hagee was wrong and stupid to say what he said, but I don't think you know what Hagee believes.  He is staunchly pro-Israel and pro-Judaism.

[dandi]

Before you condemn another man as a "radical cleric", maybe you should educate yourself on the text from which he speaks. 

The book of Ezekiel spells out very clearly that God was going to punish the Israelites by killing 1/3 of them by the sword, killing 1/3 by famine and disease, and scatter the remnant to the wind, but they would be regathered in the promised land.

The fact that Mr. Hagee's words might have some basis in Scripture does not make them any less radical or repugnant than they are.

Might have some basis in scripture?  Any less "radical or repugnant"?  If you can be honest with yourself, ask what was the single most influential event, and person, that played in the founding of the modern day state of Israel?

If some religious zealot were to proclaim, as Moses is said to have proclaimed in the Book of Leviticus, that children who disobey their parents must be killed, would you not describe that proclamation as being both radical and repugnant?

So, by your post, anyone who takes the Bible literally is a radical, is repugnant, or a religious zealot.  Interesting.  You haven't read the relevant scripture even though I gave you the book in which they are located and you are guessing at the laws that were given to Moses by God (not proclaimed by Moses).

After so blatant a display of ignorance, tell me, exactly why should I accept your premise?

[Lord Undies]

Before you condemn another man as a "radical cleric", maybe you should educate yourself on the text from which he speaks. 

The book of Ezekiel spells out very clearly that God was going to punish the Israelites by killing 1/3 of them by the sword, killing 1/3 by famine and disease, and scatter the remnant to the wind, but they would be regathered in the promised land.

The fact that Mr. Hagee's words might have some basis in Scripture does not make them any less radical or repugnant than they are.

Might have some basis in scripture?  Any less "radical or repugnant"?  If you can be honest with yourself, ask what was the single most influential event, and person, that played in the founding of the modern day state of Israel?

If some religious zealot were to proclaim, as Moses is said to have proclaimed in the Book of Leviticus, that children who disobey their parents must be killed, would you not describe that proclamation as being both radical and repugnant?

So, by your post, anyone who takes the Bible literally is a radical, is repugnant, or a religious zealot.  Interesting.  You haven't read the relevant scripture even though I gave you the book in which they are located and you are guessing at the laws that were given to Moses by God (not proclaimed by Moses).

After so blatant a display of ignorance, tell me, exactly why should I accept your premise?

The Nocturnal Emission does not answer direct questions.  Liberalism cannot exist and answer direct questions at the same time. 

[Tess Anderson]

Ezekiel was awesome...don't forget what he did to his hair to symbolize the 1/3 idea. And he had to eat gross bread.

Before you condemn another man as a "radical cleric", maybe you should educate yourself on the text from which he speaks. 

The book of Ezekiel spells out very clearly that God was going to punish the Israelites by killing 1/3 of them by the sword, killing 1/3 by famine and disease, and scatter the remnant to the wind, but they would be regathered in the promised land.

The fact that Mr. Hagee's words might have some basis in Scripture does not make them any less radical or repugnant than they are. If some religious zealot were to proclaim, as Moses is said to have proclaimed in the Book of Leviticus, that children who disobey their parents must be killed, would you not describe that proclamation as being both radical and repugnant?

I think I've lost track of this thread, but I get the impression from reading some of your posts that you were either brought up with no religion or one that would avoid eschatology...maybe Catholic or Mormon?

But , if some religious zealot did say that, it would be fair IMO to declare the entire religion to be "radical and repugnant" - I call that "Islam".

[Splashdown]

How does every thread that TNO participates in turn into a debate about the existence of God? 

We get it. You don't believe. Fine. Good luck with that. Does every debate you participate in have to go back to that?

[dandi]

Before you condemn another man as a "radical cleric", maybe you should educate yourself on the text from which he speaks. 

The book of Ezekiel spells out very clearly that God was going to punish the Israelites by killing 1/3 of them by the sword, killing 1/3 by famine and disease, and scatter the remnant to the wind, but they would be regathered in the promised land.

The fact that Mr. Hagee's words might have some basis in Scripture does not make them any less radical or repugnant than they are.

Might have some basis in scripture?  Any less "radical or repugnant"?  If you can be honest with yourself, ask what was the single most influential event, and person, that played in the founding of the modern day state of Israel?

If some religious zealot were to proclaim, as Moses is said to have proclaimed in the Book of Leviticus, that children who disobey their parents must be killed, would you not describe that proclamation as being both radical and repugnant?

So, by your post, anyone who takes the Bible literally is a radical, is repugnant, or a religious zealot.  Interesting.  You haven't read the relevant scripture even though I gave you the book in which they are located and you are guessing at the laws that were given to Moses by God (not proclaimed by Moses).

After so blatant a display of ignorance, tell me, exactly why should I accept your premise?

The Nocturnal Emission does not answer direct questions.  Liberalism cannot exist and answer direct questions at the same time. 

Oh, I know that.  But it is fun to have it put on display.   

[Chris_]

How does every thread that TNO participates in turn into a debate about the existence of God? 

We get it. You don't believe. Fine. Good luck with that. Does every debate you participate in have to go back to that?

Yep.  Limited to a single dimension.

[Wretched Excess]

How does every thread that TNO participates in turn into a debate about the existence of God? 

We get it. You don't believe. Fine. Good luck with that. Does every debate you participate in have to go back to that?

not every thread that he participates in turns into an "anti-God" thread, just every thread that he starts.  we have
an operational agreement.

[Lacarnut]

Yeah, one wonders how many women this "radical cleric" has suppressed, or how many heads this "radical cleric" has chopped off, or how many holy wars, jihads, this "radical cleric" has called for.

The nocturnally foul one's doing that old trick again, equating a minor irritant, this "radical cleric" with an authentic threat, as if they're equal.

LOL! One does not need to chop off heads to be a radical. At least not in my book.

True, just think like a liberal democrat. Rev. Wright, greaseball Al, Jessie and Obama come to mind.