Green | December 09, 2008 | 71 comments

Bush admits Bible 'probably not' literally true

Image
bansheewail
US President George W. Bush said in an interview Monday that the Bible is "probably not" literally true and that a belief that God created the world is compatible with the theory of evolution.

"I think you can have both," Bush, who leaves office January 20, told ABC television, adding "You're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president."

But "evolution is an interesting subject. I happen to believe that evolution doesn't fully explain the mystery of life," said the president, an outspoken Christian who often invokes God in his speeches.

"Bush must have missed that Neo-con memo."
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Politics,   Green,   Science
  2. tags:
    News and Politics Politics Green Science 7 more
  3.     
    |

71 comments // Bush admits Bible 'probably not' literally true

  • Robroy1
    • 0
      Robroy1  
    • We should all realize this drunken sob does not know what he is talking about most of the time and the other part of the time he is lying. But I also believe the Old testament is a fairy tail made up by Moses based on the Egyptian Book of the dead right donw to the ten commandments and heaven and hell. Read them both and you will see the parallels.

    • 3 years ago
  • damnneargenius
    • 0
      damnneargenius  
    • The part of religion that I took issue with as a child (and still do today) is the people that are literally stupid enough to take the Bible literally.

      If they presented the entire story as a metaphorical fairytale, I could agree with it, but the fact that they try to instill moral behavior by preaching lies as if they are true is just a little too impossible for my much smarter than average mind to accept.

      I'm the kind of person that writes religions, not the kind that believes them literally.

      It's all just a show kids. A really elaborate, impressive show, that was probably built on a loose variation of the truth at some point.

      Religion is for those that need it, but if it works for you , AND actually gives you a reason to be a good person AND you actually are a good person (i.e. don't lie or hurt others).... the more power to you.

    • 3 years ago
  • wlwatkins
    • 0
      wlwatkins  
    • auh...but didn't we know he never felt a God fearing approach to the lives he single handedly has taken.....all in the scope of his self made thrown.
      a true self made oil driven dumb ass, of all the things he has done, this alone shall end any kind of political career, thankfully

    • 3 years ago
  • damnneargenius
    • 0
      damnneargenius  
    • Good for him.

      I say "God" designed life to design itself, and wallah!...you've got evolution. Now, if only we can get a certain few to stop reversing all that progress.

      An evolution in understanding of human behavior by humans is what led to constructs such as religion, but those are technically constructs of God as well, because he built into some humans a desire to be good (safe, harmless, caring, humble) people, and the Bible etc. was just a means of justifying creating a story and "belief" to rationalize and reinforce that desire to be "righteous" toward your fellow man and woman.

      Pretty epic storyline, you have to admit.

      Religion just gives those that need it a reason and excuse to live in the more tempered manner that they have chosen.

      Society and life itself would much rather see people be "crazy good" than "crazy bad" if it wants to survive.

    • 3 years ago
  • wiredbirds
  • PoliticalGeek
  • NoGodsNoMasters
    • 0
      NoGodsNoMasters  
    • Really? What was it that tipped Dubya off? Was it the fact that a four legged snake tricked 2 naked hippies to eat a piece of fruit that was off limits? How about the fact that it implies the earth to be only 5 thousand years old? Or maybe it was the little ditty about an old guy who crammed his family and billions of different species of animals on a ship that was only 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high in order to avoid a global flood that would fill up over the highest mountain? Theres also the area where angels have sex with humans giving birth to the nephilim who grow up to become giants like Goliath, there is talk of unicorns, a global apocalypse, zombies (in the instance of people rising from the dead), and god hanging out with Satan to torture some dude named Job? Was it any of that stuff?

    • 3 years ago
  • NickMD
    • 0
      NickMD  
    • If this is him actually making a bit of sense then come January 19 I expect him to say that we all got punked. Next thing you know he thinks he's a genius.

    • 3 years ago
  • hapykap
    • 0
      hapykap  
    • The Bible is just one step in our evolutionary journey. It was an necessary component of the times and because of its ideology about the unknown it has given comfort and a foundation until the 100th monkey revels a new Thesis.

      Basically we are God-ape creatures who have evolved and learned; and have become conscious of our existence and want to explore all our possibilities.

      Create new Awareness in the collective consciousness. Link to the God-mind and reveal our next evolution. Stop with the herd mentality.

      Mind Focus Concentration = Your Greatness and sharing it with the world...

    • 3 years ago
  • UrbanGypsy
    • 0
      UrbanGypsy  
    • All the evangelicals that voted for him because they thought he was a really devout Christian turn out to have been fooled... Its official now.

    • 3 years ago
  • rainbowryan420
  • petarro
    • 0
      petarro  
    • Of course. The bible is not Literal! If it would be literal, thing would be much different...

      This Bush picture and stigmas are quite offensive to me.

    • 3 years ago
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • damnneargenius
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  
    • petarro:

      Raptor Jesus did it for me, but, then, I have always liked dinosaurs. ... Is not the plural of stigma as in a mark of Christ stigmata? Stigmas are non-religious scars or parts of a flower.

    • 3 years ago
  • jogglef
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  
    • While there are legitmate doubts about the accuracy of the Bible (and it's many supernatural accounts) we can all agree that Mormonism and Scientology are 100 percent verified and accurate.

      No one can doubt that Joseph Smith found gold plates inscribed with Egyptian hieroglyphs that only he could read with the aid of a special pair of glasses....from which he personally dictated the Book of Mormon while, uh, hiding behind a bedsheet because, um, if anyone but him actually SAW the gold tablets or his special reading glasses they would all die. At least that was the explination Joe gave everyone.

      We can all agree that THAT story is both logical and resonable.

      Same with Scientology. I think all intelligent (and moral!) people can agree that human beings are actually the former slaves of intergalactic alien overlords and that in order to obtain a "clear" mind we should pay church officals $80,000 to recieve special "treatments" using, uh, a special device called a e-meter to measure our, um, level of un-clearness.

      So, yeah, while the Bible has some crazy irrational shit in it at least we can all rely on the steady, somber and serious intellectual ideas contained in both the Book of Mormon and Dianetics.

    • 3 years ago
  • RCS
  • PajamaDan
    • 0
      PajamaDan  
    • Why woudn't he say this? It's like Iraq's WMD situation, "Mission Accomplished", or our imminent victory,... they're probably not literally true.
      The sad part is,... someone had to read the Bible's CliffsNotes to him. Unless they have "Pop-Up Bible stories for kids & bad presidents".
      Maybe,... one day,... enough time & reconstruction will pass,... and we'll be able to forget about this guy.

    • 3 years ago
  • unimatrix0
  • RCS
  • NoGodsNoMasters
  • unimatrix0
  • omordn
  • pokesmot
  • ClareW
    • 0
      ClareW  
    • Now dear old Dubya has said some funny things, but this is up there....."I'm just a simple president."

      did he think we were all under the impression he was some sort of scientific genius, or religious expert?

    • 3 years ago
  • jomahu
    • 0
      jomahu  
    • hmmm, now i really wonder who was advising him about his policies on iraq, gay marriage, abstinence-only programs, no child left behind....

      oh, yeh....cheney.

    • 3 years ago
  • DeliaTheArtist
    • 0
      DeliaTheArtist  
    • Chow, both links give pretty much the same information, yours has a couple more quotes from him. The confusion over the Iraq War is about the fact that Bush reportedly told Palenstinian politicians he was "on a mission from god" when dealing with Afghanistan and Iraq. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa)

      Meanwhile, ole W is saying the same thing I hear a million other people say. My problem is this:

      If we are going to admit that pieces of the bible are probably not literally true, how should we know that ANY of it is literally true? Why should the story of Jesus, or even the existence of god at all (at least the god of Christianity and Judaism) be considered literally true?

    • 3 years ago
  • majormajor
  • majormajor
  • nazbags
  • BlatantlyBlunt
    • 0
      BlatantlyBlunt  
    • Bush has his right to make his comment but people shouldn't necessarily take much notice of what he says regarding religion and more specifically evolution.

      You wouldn't take as much notice if the Pope gave his views on whether Democracy or Autocracy were the best..
      fair play to him tho, hes tryna clean up his image a bit... when you got nothing, you got nothing to lose (oh apart from the little respect you had from the religious 'right')..

    • 3 years ago
  • tablet
    • 0
      tablet  
    • "I'm just a simple president." Really, I thought this simple president had a personal conversation with God when times are tough. God advised him on the Iraq/Afghan wars and the rest of his decisions during his first term. When things get tough: environment, economy and Iraq war he gains some sanity. The sad part is he pandered to people that believe in the literal interpretation of the bible; so he could stay in office.

    • 3 years ago
  • jogglef
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  
    • Whoa...whoa...whoa!

      So the whole segment where God turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt might not be literally true???

      I guess this means that it's okay to rape, steal and murder with impunity! Aaarrgghh!

      (That is how the Christians typically respond whenever someone suggests that the Bible might not be literal....isn't it?)

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
  • jonnywas
  • jogglef
  • mako2424
    • 0
      mako2424  
    • So, in an effort to get the entire world to hate him, Bush does this to piss off the religious right, the only group in which he still held any semblance of popularity?

      Well played, W. Well played.

    • 3 years ago
  • RCS
  • CapCee
    • 0
      CapCee  
    • What's wrong with believing that a supernatural being "intelligently designed" creatures that happen to evolve over time?

    • 3 years ago
  • ajpacella
  • shelchak
    • 0
      shelchak  
    • They've obviously stopped telling him what to say, these days, so we're getting a glimpse of what he really thinks about things.

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  
    • After babbling about Intelligent Design a while back, and making himself look quite foolish as a result, why bother coming out and saying something that makes even a little sense now? The time to act rational is at the beginning or in the middle of your presidency, not at the end.

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • extracrazykiwi2008
  • bansheewail
  • slorenz
    • 0
      slorenz  
    • What the!?!? He starts to appear rational at the END of his presidency? Oh well...I'll take it. I can't wait to tell my far right wing protestant midwestern aunts about this!

    • 3 years ago
  • motokoinversailles
  • bansheewail
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • bansheewail:

      Misquoted, I think.

      I don't think he said that it was not literal as in all literal. He most likely stated that there are parts that are and parts that are not.

      Too many people state the same thing and too many people jump on it assuming they said something they did it. It's not what you think he said, it's what he actually said.

      I don't know if that's what he said, because it apparently is in to use bits an pieces when people give answers and make the read think something that most likely isn't true.

    • 3 years ago
  • bansheewail
  • J_Jammer
  • bansheewail
    • 0
      bansheewail  
    • bansheewail:

      You don't think that this is "news" to a BUNCH of people??, (people like all of my southern "bible belt" relatives). Saying I "agree" with the article mischaracterizes the process. I do think it people should know that he is trying to redefine himself in the closing days of his failed presidency. Bush used peoples' faith against them. Good people got lied to. It's important. When a leader uses Jesus as a control structure to justify a war based on lies, it is news and it is wrong.

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • flyingkick
  • DeliaTheArtist
    • 0
      DeliaTheArtist  
    • bansheewail:

      Jammer, how can you jump on banshee for assuming things and then say "He most likely stated that there are parts that are and parts that are not." - You are assuming just as much.

      This is what he said from the source given by chowmein down below:
      "You know. Probably not. ... No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it, but I do think that the New Testament for example is ... has got ... You know, the important lesson is 'God sent a son,'"

      Right. A lot of people say the same thing. My problem, as I responded below, is why if SOME parts of the bible aren't "literally true", why is ANY of it?

    • 3 years ago
  • lapedro
    • 0
      lapedro  
    • bansheewail:

      Some parts can be true and others are not, because some parts have been validated and other have not. Quite simple. The validation includes cross-referencing with several cultures' histories, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. Just like if I told you that I smoke a lot of weed and snort cocaine all day. While I do smoke a lot of weed (the thc level in my blood is measurable), there is no evidence to suggest that I snort blow all day. I could write that in a book and...voila! - a book containing both truths and untruths! Incredible!

    • 3 years ago
  • lapedro
    • 0
      lapedro  
    • bansheewail:

      I do realize, however, that the point you are probably trying to make is, how is the common person supposed to differentiate between the truths and untruths? If so, I understand completely.

    • 3 years ago
  • justright
  • DeliaTheArtist
    • 0
      DeliaTheArtist  
    • bansheewail:

      lapedro, yes, that is a very good point! Unfortunately there are plenty "unverifiable" events and assertions in the bible that people live by or think of as true. Also, even if something written both in the bible and the dead sea scrolls does not mean that it's necessarily true or historically accurate. And of course, the existence of god, the cornerstone of any believer's faith, seems like it can't BE verified by the scientific methods we employee today.

    • 3 years ago
  • TopScruffy
    • 0
      TopScruffy  
    • bansheewail:

      Catholics believe in a non-literal translation of the bible, aka the Catholic cop out. This is important though because he is a protestant and they believe in literal translation of the bible. EX = They really think Eve came from Adam, Catholics see it as a metaphor.

    • 3 years ago
more from Green:

top videos