a rebuttal....

I read an article entitled, "Mideast conflict not a sign of End Times," written by Kathleen Parker of the Orlando Sentinel.
In this article she compared Christian evangelicals to Islamic lunacy, but, then she would point out the obvious by saying Islamist promote violence in the name of Allah and Christians promote such wimpy notions like tolerance and forgivness, redemption and cheek-turning.
She had me at her tongue-in-cheek style of poking fun at both sides but then she started saying on the other side of her mouth that Christians certainly did not have the ear of our President, Condi Rice was not reading the "Left Behind" books and John Hagee did not hold political office.
In other words, there was no foreign policy making based on such apocalyptic notions that we, Christians were problematic because "we suffer from anti-intellectualism and over-heated eschatological expectations."
Apparently I'm dumber than a fence-post because I adhere to biblical authority, but I shouldn't look to the President for any support.
Thanks for clearing that up for me, Kathleen, I have been waiting for the administration to start it's promotion of the upcoming Apocalyse and can't wait to see banners and signs that read "Bring it on Iran!" or "Anti-christ, where are you now?" being waved around in the Rose Garden.
Really, thanks for setting me straight, Kathleen.
Here's one for you:
Instead of spending your "airtime" writing articles that confuse and aspire folks to scratch their heads instead of filling their heads with whatever it was you were trying to say, why not get down on your knees and pray that God will fill your heart with a desire for Truth, His Truth, and pray for this administration to make wise policies that would align with God's will.
I do not wish to offend, but, to this Christianist, I saw that in your article , you don't know where to stand.
God spoke in the bible that it is better to be hot or cold, not lukewarm, because then He would spew you from His mouth.