Is Bush willfully bringing on Armegedon?

This is both a politcal scandal question and a religious one, so not sure of fish or fowl, I posted it here.
I came across this page at a Christian Fundamentalist website where an End Times prophecy author was responding to a Q&A on Bush being complicit to bring about a massive war in the Middle East, step one in the End Time game. His take from interacting with the Bush family is that yes, GW knows he is playing a role in the Armegedon prophecies.

From the Jack Van Impe Ministries site:
www.jvim.com...

What do you folks think?

No.

Assuming a couple things:

1) Bush, as a Christian, knows that what is prophesied will happen, not because it needs to be brought about, but because the prophesy is nothing more than a glimpse into the future. There is nothing that needs be willfully done in order to make what was seen in a prophesy come about.

2) He would know that the prophesy does not revolve around the acts or actions of North America involving itself in the Mid-East, but those from the North of Israel, the Kings from the East and, not to forget, the anti-Christ, which will not be Bush.

Now, even if he is nothing more than a believer that has never took the time to study and grow in the word, surely he'd know that bringing about Armageddon would look pretty bad on a Nobel Peace Prize application!!

TC,You think old Ma bus h would care if he got a peace prize?
He wouldn't even be able to find Oslo to accept it.Norway?No way.

You know, those liberal attempts to paint Bush as stupid grow old.
Bush was asked to name the leader of India, Packistan, Chechnya and Taiwan. I doubt Gore or Clinton could have answered the question.

Speaking of sharp knives, how about these quotes:

Bill Clinton: "This is still the greatest country in the world, if we just steel our wills and lose our minds."

Al Gore: "A zebra cannot change its spots"

Al Gore: "I always had a very vivid and clear sense that men and women were entirely and completely equal---if not more so."

The Shrub has done an outstanding job on the international scene, whether or not he knows who the leader of Botwania is. If the need for such information arises, there will be someone standing by, that isn't much of a leader but knows such facts that can tell him the guy's name.

And, no, he probably wouldn't want it, anyway. It has become such a political tool and joke, who would?

I find this interesting.

I do agree somewhat with what Mr Crowne said. but I must ask his opinion again about what he said concerning his idea that nothing has to wilfully be done in order for a prophecy to come about.

I'm finding this hard for me to explain my meaning Thomas, but bare with me as i just give a little example to counter your idea.

As you and I know It was prophesied in the old testament that a messiah was coming and that he would be tortured and crucified. In psalms and Isaiah it gives detailed explanation of what was going to happen to christ. So in order for this prophecy to come about as it was written in the OT. Jesus had to wilfully do that which was written and recieve the specific tortures mentioned in the OT. As well as obviously the actual crucifiction itself.

I do agree with you though on what you said about Mr bush.

Maybe the prophecy in revelations has no direct link involving North american activity in the middle east. But I'm sure that when this prophecy comes about it will involve diplomatic and political issues between USA and the middle east.

I have seen the Billy Graham version of interpretation, and he's his sponsor.
Also, given the real catalyst factor more than the direct player role, a simple decision tree question can cause him to choose an option that is in line with what he sees to be the ultimate outcome. In other words, if he thinks he knows what should happen, he'll choose option toward that end.

Plus, who are we kidding, HE IS THE ANTI- CHRIST!!

Christ knew what was to happen, Stewards, as He is God, and He did as He did to show us how to live and also to pay the price for our sins and at the same time graft the gentile into the gift. While God knew how it was to end as He knows the beginning to the end, the human participants acted their part out as they were going to do. In other words, He is never surprised. All Christ had to do is act as He would, and the end result, of course, matched the prophesy.

Ok, now I have a headache!

But to continue. Sure, the U.S. will play a part. When the folks from the North (from the area of Russia) invade Israel, the Lion and her cubs will play the diplomat card instead of coming to Israel's military defense. The Lion being England and her cubs, obviously the nations that came from her. The U.S. is one of them.

We certainly do not know all the underlying events and onsgoings as the leaders of the U.S. and Britain do, but I cannot imagine George doing something that would drive the world to chaos. If he does, it won't be because he knows prophesy, it'll be because it is what he was going to do.
This whole mental exercise reminds me of a mind bender: If God is ominpotent, can He create a rock that even He cannot pick up?

TC,I know Bush isn't dumb and he won't bring about armagedon by deliberately fulfilling prophesies.

I think he sees an oppotunity to change the world,in his view for the better.
He wants to make the world a better place for Americans to live in.

Though good point by Stewards. Didn't Jesus ride a donkey into Jerusalem to fulfill a prophecy?Zechariah?

John 12:14 "And Jesus, when He had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,"
Did He do that to fulifill prophesy, or was prophesy fulfilled when He did that? And, if He did it knowing that He was fulfilling prophesy, does that mean He was attempting to fulfill prophesy when He did it?
There's a great bit of difference between the Son of God doing something that He knows fulfills prophesy and the Shrub thinking that by doing something he might fulfill prophesy?

Is, by him trying to fulfill prophesy and just happening to be doing it at the right time and place actually fulfilling it?
Am I the only one developing a migraine right now?

He may be inadvertantly setting the stage for down the road, I'll agree to, but to anything else I'd have to plead lack of evidence.
I love you guys, but this has driven me to the aspirin bottle!

I can't find anything in that last post I could possibly disagree with.

You seem stressed of late TC.all OK I hope.

Naw, I'm ok for the most part. What isn't up to par will be eventually!
Thanks for asking, too.

TC, concerning what you posted on 13-11-2002 at 16:04...

...You have been engulfed by The Matrix...

For this week only, I'm running a special on asprin by the caseload...

As a FYI:

Bush belongs to a mainstream Christian sect and like most mainstream sects, it does not teach about an imminent rapture/armageddon/etc.

I'd say he gives it no thought at all.

YES! Christian? What would a real christian be doing at a satanic gathering "Bohimian Grove"? Or for that matter be a member of a secret satanic cult? "Scull &Bones"

I think Bush is a better actor than Clinton!

Byrd, what sect does he belong to, do you know? I have never caught that being mentioned anywhere.

Methodist.

The author in the Q&A mentions discussing the prophecy with Jeb, his parents, sending GW the video and having the book delivered via a mutual friend.
Given that the Ultra Conservative Religious Right is the most powerful faction in the Republican party, I can't see how he WOULDN'T be versed in something so important to one of the two power elite stuctures in the Party.

I'm sure they can send all the literature they like to the Methodists... having been a Methodist for awhile, I can safely say that most of them are not (or were not) believers in an "Armageddon's coming!" scenario.

And, frankly, the politicians have access to a lot of information and a lot of advisors... and they're not saying that Amrageddon/the Second Coming is about to happen.

I can't say that I've ever paid attention to their doctrine. I can't see how they would miss the end-time prophesies, but I have noticed that churches denomination over seem to be in a happy-joy feel good mode. Not much teaching involved but people leave and then come back to tithe another week.

TC -- Mainstream churches don't ignore the Book of Revelation, but they have one of two approaches on it: It's metaphor for a time that's already happened or it's a mystic's vision (sorry... it's been too long since I was a Christian to remember any great details.) If you'll check with some mainstream churches and tell them you're concerned that we're "living in the end times", most of them will reassure you that the world is getting better and not worse.

There's quite a bit of teaching that goes on in these churches (or went on), including service-oriented teaching. What does NOT go on, however, is a belief that the world is horrible and a mandate to go forth and convert everyone to that particular sect. More and more, they're becoming tolerant of other faiths and opening a dialogue with them.

I see this as positive.

I understand that you'd see it as positive, but I'm sure you understand why I do not. What is the use of believing in the Bible as guidance and Christ as the only savior if you then dilute it and deny it? It is only a fulfillemt of more prophesy, anyway, and should send even more red flags up for those who are familiar with prophesy.
Anyway, it is good in a sense that Bush won't get some goofy idea of forcing some prophesy into play. While he has shown unexpected deftness in both domestic as well as international politics, I'd hate for him to get squirrelly and start a bunch of crap out of sequence.