Log in

No account? Create an account

Some good quotes I want to keep for Posterity

TIME Magazine, 21 June 2004; cover article: "Faith, God & The Oval Office" by Nancy Gibbs

"'People don't want a President to think that every important decision has a stamp of God's approval and that God is always on his side,' says ethicist Cromartie. 'I think people want their Presidents to be pious but not self-righteously so. So there's a paradox, isn't there? A President has to seem to be relying on God's wisdom but not acting like all his decisions are God's decisions.' It's the difference between praying that you're right and believing that prayer makes you right."

"'We began to see the upsurge of religious rhetoric in the late 1990s,' Lynn says. 'There was this real sense of moral malaise in the country, among liberals and conservatives alike. They might not be able to agree on the morality, but they all agreed we didn't have enough of it.' The Columbine shootings, the impeachment battle, the corporate crookery all piled up and 'led many if not most Americans to conclude that the country had lost its moral compass,' says Green."

"'I'm not a believer in God," says Gullett, 'but I recognize that faith is a morally guiding force in most people's lives. I believe President Bush has brought honor back to the White House because of his faith. I don't see the religious community being upset with him. I see the nonreligious community being upset with him because they see faith as a threat to liberal thought.'"


Re: Dipping my toe in a possible discussion :)

Well, implying that there is a possibility that something happened outside of God's control is a bit illogical for me to swallow, but acknowledging that the Bible doesn't look perfect by current human standards is fine. Culture has changed, our access to ancient information has been reduced to a few shreds and bits of abandoned rubble, and hubris has wreaked a pile of havoc with the PR. For us, being meticulous about details in legal documents is commonplace (though that by no means implies greater accuracy! :), partly because of the printing press and greater recording technology. In ancient times, writing was less common and thus what people DID write down in such documents as those composing the Bible was focused on what they thought was especially important, which didn't always mean the precise use of language as is found in modern technical documents, etc. It doesn't make it wrong, necessarily, just a different kind of account. Plus, there is plenty of precedent for historians assuming that the Bible's dating and location citing was inaccurate, and later finding out that it was spot-on as more information was unearthed.

And what is "divine inspiration"? That's ethereality (though not complete subjectivity) for you! :)

Re: Dipping my toe in a possible discussion :)

implying that there is a possibility that something happened outside of God's control is a bit illogical for me to swallow

Understood, though I don't believe in a micromanaging God.

(There's a lot to say here, and I'm not breaking off the conversation, but I need to be at work and therefore this will have to wait till later.) :)