PDA

View Full Version : Which is worse? McCain courting Hagee or Obama rejecting Farrakhan?


jAZ
02-28-2008, 11:03 PM
You might not be aware of Pastor John Hagee (because the liberal media is protecting him? ;)):


Blames the Roman Catholic Church for conspiring with Hitler to exterminate the Jews
Blamed the sinners of New Orleans for Hurricane Katrina
Blames the Persecution of the Jews ON the Jews
Eagerly awaits Armageddon
Believes Muslims are driven by Satan
Rejects peace between Jews and Muslims in the ME because it prevents Armageddon
Sees Catholics as the anti-Christ


You are more likely aware of Farrakhan...


Endorsed much of what Hitler did in rebuilding Germany (while denouncing him as an "evil killer" in the same sentence)
Blamed the "false Jews" of Hollywood for promoting lesbianism and homosexuality
Said that white people are "potential humans"
Blamed Hurricane Katrina on an attempt to wipe out black people
Refered to Jews, Palestinian Arabs, Koreans, and Vietnamese collectively as "bloodsuckers"
calling Judaism a "gutter religion" or "dirty religion"


Which religious leader is worse?

Cochise
02-28-2008, 11:37 PM
they are probably on an even keel... Hagee's one of those TBN wackos.

elvomito
02-28-2008, 11:37 PM
Eagerly awaits Armageddon
Rejects peace between Jews and Muslims in the ME because it prevents Armageddon
where did you get that from?
you cannot have the Armageddon without peace first.
did you write that list?

HolmeZz
02-28-2008, 11:41 PM
If Hagee supported McCain on his own it shouldn't be an issue, but if he's actively seeking his endorsement that is worth talking about.

jAZ
02-28-2008, 11:51 PM
where did you get that from?
you cannot have the Armageddon without peace first.
did you write that list?
Not all peaces are equal per end-times.

elvomito
02-28-2008, 11:58 PM
Not all peaces are equal per end-times.
not sure what you mean.
the antichrist will make a 7-year peace covenant that will be great(thats how you know who the antichrist is) but 3.5 years through, it will be broken which is the beginning of armageddon

if he really wanted armageddon, he should be hoping for that peace agreement

jAZ
02-28-2008, 11:58 PM
If Hagee supported McCain on his own it shouldn't be an issue, but if he's actively seeking his endorsement that is worth talking about.
<embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=2204193204179120755&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>

Cochise
02-28-2008, 11:58 PM
where did you get that from?
you cannot have the Armageddon without peace first.
did you write that list?

it's worth pointing out that this is only one interpretation, and one i think that has only become popular in the last two hundred years or so since it was pioneered by Darby in the 1800s.

it's certainly not a mainstream position that people should do whatever they can to try to 'provoke it' per se.

jAZ
02-28-2008, 11:59 PM
not sure what you mean.
the antichrist will make a 7-year peace covenant that will be great(thats how you know who the antichrist is) but 3.5 years through, it will be broken which is the beginning of armageddon

if he really wanted armageddon, he should be hoping for that peace agreement
I interpreted that incorrectly... thanks for the correction. And FTR, it's my own list.

jAZ
02-29-2008, 12:02 AM
it's certainly not a mainstream position that people should do whatever they can to try to 'provoke it' per se.
It's pretty hard to belive that these people aren't directly impacting our foreign policy in the ME with a very direct purpose of either "provoking" things or at least allowing the prophecy to play out without interuption.

HolmeZz
02-29-2008, 12:03 AM
<embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=2204193204179120755&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>

Yeah, if the media is going to pile on Obama as he rejects Farrahan's support, McCain should get more heat for embracing Hagee's.

Cochise
02-29-2008, 12:05 AM
It's pretty hard to belive that these people aren't directly impacting our foreign policy in the ME with a very direct purpose of either "provoking" things or at least allowing the prophecy to play out without interuption.

Well, who are 'these people'?

I don't believe that John Hagee is dictating foreign policy, although I can see why it might be advantageous politically for the opposition to portray him as such.

It does not require any kind of religious fervor for one to believe that Israel has a right to exist, for example, and that we are right to at least support them in that. There's a long leap between McCain seeking the support of a prominent religious leader and placing that person in charge of foreign policy.

jAZ
02-29-2008, 12:09 AM
Well, who are 'these people'?

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjMRgT5o-Ig"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjMRgT5o-Ig" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Cochise
02-29-2008, 12:18 AM
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you feel that this small fraction of people who believe as such are part of a Zionist conspiracy which controls our foreign policy.

jAZ
02-29-2008, 12:21 AM
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you feel that this small fraction of people who believe as such are part of a Zionist conspiracy which controls our foreign policy.

Lots of "small groups of people" have far greater influence than their numbers.

jAZ
02-29-2008, 12:22 AM
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you feel that this small fraction of people who believe as such are part of a Zionist conspiracy which controls our foreign policy.
And "Zionist conspiracy" is your words, not mine.

Cochise
02-29-2008, 12:30 AM
And "Zionist conspiracy" is your words, not mine.

Well, doesn't the shoe fit the accusation you are making?

jAZ
02-29-2008, 01:27 AM
Well, doesn't the shoe fit the accusation you are making?

Without understanding all of the implications and connotation of the phrase, I'm certainly not claiming it.

I'll stick with saying exactly what I'm saying. It's not much to ask that you don't paraphrase it with potentially loaded words.

I'm saying that it's really not hard to believe that a good deal of the support for our entire middle east policy (both the Iraq War in particuar and the Isreali-centric policy overall) is shaped and influenced and impacted by Judeo-Christian priorities.

That's not to suggest that oil isn't the largest driving factor. It most certainly is.

But this crowd is working with a Neo-Con crowd to amplify an agenda. And that agenda is rooted in several goals. Modern Neo-Cons have one set of goals (American exceptionalism). But the religious crowd has influence... and under the Bush administration, they have a direct champion.

ClevelandBronco
02-29-2008, 03:56 AM
As just one evangelical Christian who has read two of Mr. Hagee's books, I can only say that I think that he is misguided in some respects. (Big deal. I think he's misguided. Like I have some special insight into God's grand plan.)

He is very good at making his case, but still I can't buy into it. It's based on flimsy Biblical evidence (IMO), and I tend to raise my BS shield to a higher level when I hear a fundamentalist talk about a reading that abandons literal reading for metaphorical interpretation. (Usually fundamentalists insist that we read and understand literally unless there's no other way to interpret the text in question.)

I've become convinced that the Revelation of St. John is a story that encourages us to visit what might be possible here and now through a reconciliation with God in Heaven as evidenced by Jesus on earth. IMO, we can visit heaven now.

At any rate, I don't believe in end times prophesy in the way most evangelicals do. Biblical prophesy cannot account for the lapse between ages that were otherwise predicted in Daniel and the Apocalypse.

Maybe my failure to project those ideas over many centuries into the future beyond those writers makes me a bad Christian. Maybe I'm too critical of such commentators.

Everyone has the right to disagree with Mr. Hagee, but since I've actually read a couple of his books, I'm claiming the privilege to disagree.

BucEyedPea
02-29-2008, 07:32 AM
Well, doesn't the shoe fit the accusation you are making?
No, it doesn't. You throw this carnard and epithet around much more loosely than I do NC! It's called a mission or agenda. All groups have one.

Conspiracy involves a crime. Don't you believe in the official conspiracy of 9/11 about jet liners crashing into the wtc.

BucEyedPea
02-29-2008, 07:39 AM
Without understanding all of the implications and connotation of the phrase, I'm certainly not claiming it.

I'll stick with saying exactly what I'm saying. It's not much to ask that you don't paraphrase it with potentially loaded words.

I'm saying that it's really not hard to believe that a good deal of the support for our entire middle east policy (both the Iraq War in particuar and the Isreali-centric policy overall) is shaped and influenced and impacted by Judeo-Christian priorities.

That's not to suggest that oil isn't the largest driving factor. It most certainly is.

But this crowd is working with a Neo-Con crowd to amplify an agenda. And that agenda is rooted in several goals. Modern Neo-Cons have one set of goals (American exceptionalism). But the religious crowd has influence... and under the Bush administration, they have a direct champion.

I agree. I was taught as a RC that this is the Protestant Dispensationalists who believe that the "state" of Israel is the Messiah. It's a different twist on end times prophecy than a RC's. It's no wonder Hagee hates the RC church. It's also why RC's are not as strongly pro-political and military Zionism as Protestants Dispensationalists are. They are spiritually zionist ( as are Orthodox Jews) who feel the Jews get Israel through conversion which restores the convenant with God that they broke.

This fits in perfectly with Ann Coulter wanting to perfect the Jews. These guys are actually the true anti-semites since they reject their faith.

patteeu
02-29-2008, 07:50 AM
But the religious crowd has influence... and under the Bush administration, they have a direct champion.

Surely this doesn't mean that you think the President is driven by this goal of bringing on Armageddon?

patteeu
02-29-2008, 07:52 AM
Conspiracy involves a crime.

Not necessarily.

BucEyedPea
02-29-2008, 07:59 AM
Not necessarily.

Yes it does. People getting together with common or overlapping agendas goes on everyday in this country. Just because it's not broadly reported in the media doesn't make it a conspiracy.

All politics since the dawn of man consists of this type of activity including back-door diplomacy and back-room deals ( not that this fits with that even). It goes on in every organization too. Such things fall short of a conspiracy.


Jaz's post doesn't even remotely come close to a conspiracy but I know you're drying to hijack the thread parsing it ad infinitum.

BucEyedPea
02-29-2008, 08:01 AM
Definition of conspiracy

• a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act
• a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)
• a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

jAZ
02-29-2008, 08:31 AM
Surely this doesn't mean that you think the President is driven by this goal of bringing on Armageddon?
I personally don't believe that Bush is a sincere Christian. So no, but he's a direct champion for this group's purposes, because they provide him a huge base upon which he obtains his power.

I believe his personal motivations are as confused as any you might get from someone who comes from a childhood of great privilege and eventually needed drug and alcohol rehabilitation.

banyon
02-29-2008, 08:39 AM
Definition of conspiracy

a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act
a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)
a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Why would you post a definition that clearly undercuts your own position and enhances patteeu's?

patteeu
02-29-2008, 10:09 AM
Yes it does. People getting together with common or overlapping agendas goes on everyday in this country. Just because it's not broadly reported in the media doesn't make it a conspiracy.

All politics since the dawn of man consists of this type of activity including back-door diplomacy and back-room deals ( not that this fits with that even). It goes on in every organization too. Such things fall short of a conspiracy.


Jaz's post doesn't even remotely come close to a conspiracy but I know you're drying to hijack the thread parsing it ad infinitum.

I'm not even going to bother quoting the dictionary for you. Please look up the word and recognize that there are mulitple definitions for "conspiracy", only some of which include a crime as a necessary component.

What you call "parsing" most would call "being accurate".

patteeu
02-29-2008, 10:11 AM
Why would you post a definition that clearly undercuts your own position and enhances patteeu's?

She's anti-parsing.

patteeu
02-29-2008, 10:13 AM
I personally don't believe that Bush is a sincere Christian. So no, but he's a direct champion for this group's purposes, because they provide him a huge base upon which he obtains his power.

I believe his personal motivations are as confused as any you might get from someone who comes from a childhood of great privilege and eventually needed drug and alcohol rehabilitation.

OK. That makes more sense (even though I suspect he's more sincere about his Christianity than you believe).

Bowser
02-29-2008, 10:17 AM
OK. That makes more sense (even though I suspect he's more sincere about his Christianity than you believe).



<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D0IJkD0znCQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D0IJkD0znCQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Adept Havelock
02-29-2008, 11:10 AM
I doubt nutjob Bill Donohue's Catholic League will condemn Obama for rejecting Farrakhan.

I wonder how McCain will respond to this.

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=27008

Deberg_1990
02-29-2008, 08:58 PM
It appears that McCain is trying to distance himself from Hagee now...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080301/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_pastor


I find it funny that Hagee didnt endorse Huckabee a fellow Evangelical??

Ultra Peanut
02-29-2008, 09:34 PM
ELECTION 2008: MUSLIMS VS THE ZOG