warning: this is an angry, bitter blog post and isn’t for the easily offended

FoxNews.com: Bush Says Creation ‘Not Incompatible’ With Evolution — President says in televised interview the Bible is “probably not” literally true and that a belief God created the world is compatible with the theory of evolution

This interview was pretty interesting. I was pleasantly surprised that Bush has as nuanced of a theology as he expresses in this interview, but I also was struck by a bigger question.

Why did conservatives (of both the political and religious persuasions) ever think he was a Biblical literalist?

I do believe that there are very few real literalists out there, but if there are, wouldn’t it make sense that the teachings of Jesus be central to one’s beliefs?

Until now, most conservatives would have said that Bush was a “Christian president” who takes the Bible literally. And yet, they flat out ignore the fact that he did not practice the core teachings of Jesus as President.

For example in the Sermon on the Mount, Christ said, “But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also… Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you …”

In opposition to the very clear teachings of Jesus, George Bush made it clear that not only were there evildoers in the world, but that they should be hunted down, “dead or alive.” And he didn’t just go after the individual evildoers, but he went to war against entire nations and led our troops to battle, which resulted in the slaughter of men, women and children, who had nothing to do with the evil he was resisting.

And yet, George Bush claimed he was a Christian. He was very open about his faith, and still is (as he expresses in the interview).

Now it is obvious that George Bush is not a literalist and never was a literalist.

The question I have… why does he even call himself a Christian? And why do most Americans trumpet so proudly their faith in Jesus, when they have written off the very core of what Jesus taught?

I normally try to be very ecumenical in my approach and normally am uncomfortable with saying who is and isn’t in the Church (in the broader “body of Christ” universal sense— I guess this ecunemism is a reaction to the way I was taught growing up in the Churches of Christ to see the other denominations as hell-bound), but I’m beginning to think that I am wrong in doing this. Maybe it is better to call a spade a spade, and say clearly that it is impossible to be a Christian and ignore his key core teachings on nonviolence.

Maybe I’m too emotional to think straight on these issues. A few days ago, one of my clients told me of how he saw an Iraqi kid have his head ran over by a humvee in Iraq. It was an accident (well as much as the crazy things that happen in war are ever accidents), but the kid’s face was ripped off in one clean sweep as the tire caught hold of the kid’s nose. Of course the humvee kept rolling. They couldn’t stop to help or they would likely have been killed by angry people. This is the kind of ***ing tragedy that is going on every day, while pious “Christians” are celebrating Christmas, and flying their American flags and pretending that the way of American Imperialism is Christian.

It’s not. Constantine tried to baptize Roman imperialism in his day and all he did was make the Church poisoned and that is what has happened in our day and time.

OK, I’ve said enough for tonight. I gotta try not to be hateful to the haters but right now it is hard to see straight.