Three Days

Can a Jew Go to Heaven? George W. Bush Answered "No" in 1994. Until Bush backed off this position after Billy Graham told him it was a decision for God, not governors, it was unsettling news for Jews, Muslims, and believers in any faiths other than the Christian — perhaps even for backsliding Christians.

Bush joked to reporters about his '94 answer a year or so ago, prior to a trip to the Middle East. According to stories in the Austin American-Statesman, he told reporters that he planned to stop in Israel and tell the Jews they were all going to hell. An exchange of messages between Bush and the Jewish Anti-Defamation League followed. While no one has accused Bush of anti-Semitism, there have been comments about his insensitivity, both toward the Jews and his own family. A Jewish reporter said Bush's remarks were quite upsetting to his son. No one in the Bush family has commented, but there's little doubt that Bush has touched a sore spot in family history.

http://bushwatch.org/jews.htm

If I remember correctly, his answer to, "Can a Jew get into Heaven," was something like, "My religion teaches that only if you accept JC as your personal saviour can you get to Heaven." That's definitely a paraphrase; I will try to find the actual quote from a more reliable/independent source.

 

He has never actually recanted this statement so I think it's safe to assume he still believes it until he says otherwise.

Bush clarifies his stand on Jews, heaven

(JWR) ---- (http://www.jewishworldreview.com) TEXAS GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH has clarified remarks he made in 1993 which seemed to indicate that he believed only Christians had a place in heaven.

Bush, a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2000, first caused controversy when he told a story about his religious faith in an interview published in The Houston Post during his 1994 campaign for governor, and he recounted that story in a New York Times Magazine profile this September.

Bush said he was visiting his parents in the White House and, having at that time recently recommitted to religion, began to discuss “who goes to heaven” with his mother, Barbara. Bush pointed to a passage in the Christian Bible which said that “only Christians had a place in heaven.”

Barbara disagreed, saying, “Surely, God will accept others,” but Bush said, “Mom, here’s what the New Testament says.” So Barbara called Billy Graham, and, said Bush, “Billy said, ‘From a personal perspective, I agree with what George is saying, the New Testament has been my guide. But I want to caution you both. Don’t play God. Who are you two to be God?’ ”

While to some the story may indicate someone grappling with how to reconcile one’s religious faith with the world around him (and Bush himself said, in the Houston Post article, that the lesson he learned was “listen to the New Testament, but don’t be harshly judgmental”), others found the statement troubling. A fund-raising letter for Garry Mauro, Bush’s Democratic opponent in the 1998 gubernatorial election, was circulated this fall which mentioned “George W. Bush’s views about the chances of Jewish people in the hereafter” — signed by National Jewish Democratic Council chairman Monte Friedkin, fomer Texas governor Ann Richards and Texas businessman Bernard Rapoport.

The issue once again appeared on the radar screen when Bush announced at the November Republican Governors Association meeting that he would be making a National Jewish Coalition-sponsored trip to Israel. When asked by the same Texas reporter who intially relayed his view on heaven what he was going to say to Israeli Jews, Bush, obviously joking, said the first thing he would tell them is that they were all “going to hell.”

Anti-Defamation League national president Abraham Foxman asked Bush, in a letter, to clarify his remarks, and Bush responded last week.

“I am troubled that some people were hurt by my remarks,” he wrote. “I never intended to make judgments about the faith of others.”

Bush continued: “Judgments about heaven do not belong in the realm of politics or this world; they belong to a Higher Authority. In discussing my own personal faith as a Christian, I in no way meant to imply any disrespect or to denigrate any other religion. During my four years as governor, I have set a positive tone that indicates my respect for individuals from all faiths, all backgrounds and all walks of life.”

Foxman, in a statement, declared that the matter is “now behind us.” He said the ADL welcomes “the governor’s sensitivity and demonstration of respect for religions other than his own and his commitment to tolerance, diversity and the principles of religious freedom.”

But are a politician’s religious views an issue for discussion? And were Bush’s views unusual? Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, founder and president of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, said that the theology of Evangelical Christians has an “exclusivist” nature to it — believing in the “centrality of Jesus” in order to obtain salvation — which runs counter to many other religions, and even other denominations of Christianity. For example, Eckstein notes that in Judaism, one can be considered a good person without being Jewish by observing the Noahide laws outlined in Genesis.

But, Eckstein said, there is a difference between “theological intolerance” — the fundamental belief of Evangelicals that they have the ultimate truth — and “practical intolerance” — for instance, denying Jews the right to pray.

“It shouldn’t come to the point that everyone who believes they have the ultimate truth is a bogeyman. I don’t believe Billy Graham is an intolerant person,” Eckstein said, even though Graham, while telling Bush not to play God, did not disagree with the passage Bush read about heaven. Eckstein emphasized that the important issue is whether that theology is carried into society, and whether a politician draws up public policy based on that belief. In the case of Bush, Eckstein said that “it is legitimate to ask” for a clarification of his views, and “it sounds like he explained satisfactorily.”

Rev. Dr. Clark Lobenstine, executive director of the InterFaith Conference of Metropolitan Washington, said that he and those he works with wrestle with such issues all the time. “Part of the challenge of interreligious dialogue is that because we come as people of faith, it’s hard to imagine how everyone doesn’t want to reflect our faith. But we also know people of other faiths whose experience of God is very evident,” he said.

Lobenstine said he supports Bush’s letter clarifying his earlier comments and “encourages his respect for our diversity.”

The issue is unlikely to have any effect on future political plans for Bush, although Stephen Silberfarb, deputy executive director and general counsel for the National Jewish Democratic Council, did raise some questions. Silberfarb said the most important test is whether a politician’s religious beliefs have an effect on his policies, which so far, Silberfarb said, hasn’t been an issue. But to win the Republican nomination for president, Silberfarb stated that Bush would have to court the Christian Coalition, whose “power is considerable.”

“It remains to be seen whether he will be able to stand by that letter in the future,” Silberfarb said.

Matt Brooks, executive director of the National Jewish Coalition, said the book on this matter should be closed. “Bush has taken some time to learn and reflect. Foxman’s letter and Bush’s letter speak for themselves

 

I wasn't trying to derail the thread into politics, but Kinsley has a good roundup of the iterations of this story:

http://slate.msn.com/id/32438

Also, admittedly, from sources w/ possible bias:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1298/bush1.asp
http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/3522

 

Wow, that's shocking stuff.

Thanks for the quotes/sources guys.

 

Some people, for example the oens dying of hunger in Africa, may never be able to find this "truth". If you grew up in the middle of nowhere, with nothing around you, always hungry and always looking for food, it's likely you don't have the resources to research most religions and make a decision for yourself. Even when you make that decision, humans are limited and prone to mistakes. Some more than others. So some are bound to make mistakes, overlook some things. God may or may not lead you to the truth, but God will know what was in your heart and he will know your PURE intentions. I'm sure I'll get the ever lasting "My intentions are pure, but I don't do anything to show it" response, so let me answer you by saying that if that was infact true, then you would go ahead and pray, read the book, etc etc... You wouldn't be sitting around watching reality tv all day when there are more constructive things to do. Sure, you want to be a good person, but are you doing anything in that direction assuming you're ABLE?

You don't expect 5 billion people with different capabilities to come to the same conclusion do you? It's like giving 5 billion people different tools and expecting them all to build the same castle. As long as they put together the right amount of effort, it doesn't matter what each castle looks like. As long as they all WANTED to build a castle.

 

This quote especially intruiged me, and I wanted to comment on it.

I, as a Muslim, agree with most of what the Bible says. In fact, I'm encouraged to do so. However, with this quote I had to be careful..

To you, the quote means that Christians who follow Jesus will get to God.

But to me this means that, as known in Islam, Jesus will descend upon us once again in the future and, aside from that, will be one of the people standing at the bridge leading to the crossroads, i.e., everyone has to go through him to get to God.

That's where two religions start to go apart. Again, this is not a my way vs your way thing. I'm just pointing out why the quote doesn't convince me that everyone who wants to find the right faith can and will find it.

 

This is where Christians lose me.

So, I could spend countless hours meditating, praying, thinking, discussing but if I end up with the conclusion that I'm a Buddhist, I wasn't really seeking God with all my heart? Does that make me confused, stupid or willfully ignorant?

And, what if I just cannot accept Christian beliefs as the one and only true guiding principal of spirituality? Do I abandon those core ideals and pretend to believe just to avoid going to hell?

You know, I was a Christian - a born again Christian for many years. I've read the Bible cover to cover more than once and studied the philosophies and spiritual beliefs of many other cultures and religions. And, no matter what I study, the one concept that I seem to come back to was summed up better by Shakespeare than any religious teacher:

There are far more things in heaven and on earth, Horatio, then are dreamt of in your philosophy.

When it comes to understanding the Almighty, truth is something that is simply impossible to define because it is beyond our limited comprehension. That doesn't mean we can't have faith. In a world like ours, I think faith is probably essential for life. But, the more you learn and grow as a human, the more you realize how little you actually know about the "truth."

 

Jeff --

While I agree in large measure...I also don't think "the truth" is completely unfindable.

i know you and I talked about Paul one day over lunch...for all the starkness of Paul, he dealt with this issue in a way i think you'd like. He said that even those who had never heard about God or the story of Christ ultimately have God speaking to their conscience...and they have the knowledge of the creation all around them. And that those things point to a Creator who seeks a relationship. Basically, it sounds to me like he's arriving at some of the same conclusions you're arriving at. I don't want to sound too universalist (heaven forbid, right!!?? ) because I do believe Jesus to be who he claimed to be...or what the Gospels claim him to be. But at the same time, it appears there is a door open.

In the Gospel of Peter, Jesus comes out of the tomb and a voice from heaven says, "did you preach to the dead?" Jesus answers affirmatively. What if Jesus ALWAYS preaches to the dead?? What if he offers salvation even past the day our bodies die away? I think those are real possibilities. And I'm not about to limit God or to try to trap God in with some legalistic wrangling over his own words. Make any sense??? I'm pretty much rambling.

 

I get what you are saying, Max. I think that most Eastern philosophers think the same thing. Buddhists believe you just need to sit quietly and God will speak to you. Obviously, their version of "god" is quite different from Christians.

I don't think the principle is that different. I just think it is the execution.

 

All I'm saying that if God is beyond logic, then you can not use logic to argue for his existence, as some have tried to do here.

If the Christian god is all knowing, then he knows that there is suffering in the world.

If God is all loving, then he wouldn't want people to suffer.

If God is all-powerful, then he should be able to prevent this suffering.

Hence, an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful god is logically impossible judging by the world we live in.

Even if God isn't all loving, if you follow any kind of moral code that considers suffering to be wrong, then shouldn't God also follow that code? If God is all-kowing, he should know that suffering is wrong, and prevent it.

If you believe in a god that thinks suffering isn't wrong, then I feel sorry for you.

 

What if the suffering is humanity's fault? What if the suffering has a purpose beyond anything we can logically prove?

Who knows why God did anything ?

The only thing that holds true is that if we, as humans, think we can break down, analyze and rationalize everything God has ever done, then, mentally at least, we are God's equal, and that would eliminate the very definition of "superior being".


It's like depression. If you've been through depression, you realize it's a bitter bitter thing. Until one day, someone very knowledgeable tells you "well, arrogance and self-centerdness is the center of depression". Then you start thinking about it in the proper sense, and realize what a complete idiot you are for ever being depressed. The theory sounds cruel, but it holds true. How dare you be depressed over your job or your girl when some hungry child somewhere is bouncing in joy over finding some insects to eat?

I believe one of the first steps in the process of finding your "spirituality", as Jeff would put it, is realizing how small and insignificant you are to the universe. Even the most powerful and influential people of all time are just pushing up daisies now. They're gone, you may or may not be able to see their graves, but they're gone and the universe doesn't miss them - the planets will continue revolving and the sun will continue shining.

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but this analogy is bad. I don't know much about religion, obviously, but as much psychology as I've studied I'm sure that this isn't at all correct.

It's like saying:

 

A god who thinks suffering is right, even if the suffering is the fault of a lower species, is not a god deserving of worship.

 

I think this, concisely put, is the very thing that leads me away from spirituality.

 

ZRB,

Thanks for the responses, seriously.

I am pretty sure somewhere in this long thread, your points were addressed, probably by TraJ. But I think it once again goes back to free will. God gave you the choice to have a relationship with Him or not. It is true that there are people who were very close to God, that went through suffering like Job and David, but I am pretty sure their reward in heaven was pretty great. God is always testing you and your faith, no matter how close you are to Him.

If you think about it, the life we have on this earth is nothing compared to an eternity with God. So, why get wrapped up over something that is really short-term? I know that sounds bad, but for a Christian, death is not viewed as something tragic, but something to celebrate. After all, being able to spend an eternity with Him will make you forget about any suffering you had in your earthly life.

 

OK, this is a rhetorical question, but why do many, if not almost all, Christians ( as do most all humans) fixate on collecting material goods? I have not met anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus as I read them in the New Testament in this respect. Some fixate so much on this, they are unwilling to part with the smallest part of their material goods to pay for the general welfare of society in whole or to even pay their fair share. Also, why is suicide wrong then?

 

I think this is what was alluded to earlier by others, the feel good Christian. The person who really has no interest in the practice of good Christlike ethics but just wants a religion to give him solace about his/her own mortality. In essence, if he's greedy in everyday life, he's greedy about the best of all possible (after)worlds as well.

Can't tithe 10% in the afterlife? Other than the commandment not to, I can't tell either; at least I can buy that the Jim Jones/Koresh/Heaven's Gate crowd were earnest in their desire to meet the maker.