This is just embarrassing. Here's a representative of Parliament in the ALP, which I have noted before is increasingly pandering to religious interests:
LABOR MP James Bidgood, the first-time MP under investigation for selling pictures of a protester attempting to set fire to himself outside Parliament House, has declared the global financial crisis an act of God.
Mr Bidgood, who was carpeted by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd over his actions yesterday and apologised to Parliament, makes the new claims in a DVD, The Australian reports.
In a speech to a function held in Parliament he argues that Christian marches for Jesus in London caused the October 1987 stock market crash.
He also predicted the end of the world and one world monetary system.
"We have to say 'What would Jesus do?'," he said.
"In 1987 there was another march for Jesus. That took place in April. And guess what happened in October 1987? The stock market crashed. All property values lost one this of their value and over a million people lost their homes.
"I believe when Christians pray, God does things. I believe what is happening today is as much to do with God in economics bringing judgement."
He went on to warn that "there is God's justice in action in what has gone on here".
"I believe there is God's justice in action in what is going on here. We haven't seen the end of it.
"The ultimate conclusion is like I say, we look at Bible prophecy, we are going towards a one world bank and a one world monetary system. And if you believe the word of God and you read Revelations...you will see clearly what is being spelt out. We are in the end times."
Somebody put this guy on the front bench, say in the Treasury portfolio. I so want him serving my nation by preparing for the end of the world...
- Log in to post comments
At times of crises, I always ask, What would Pecos Bill do?
So praying makes the economy worse? Doesn't that mean we shouldn't be praying? I'm confused.
And I always ask, "Who is Pecos Bill?"
And we should obviously only pray for economic disasters that move God's plan of Armageddon forward, because unless we pray to God for that, He can't do anything... jeez Louise, it's obvious!
If this is an indication of what it takes to be in the ALP, I'm more than a little worried.
What I want to know is what was this function he was attending where he made this speech?
The more important worry is that he got elected. That gets you thinking that he is not only not alone, he has the majority backing him (at least in his parish).
I don't think he would have been elected 'because' of his beliefs. His religious beliefs probably weren't brought up in the election campaign. It's just a nasty post election surprise.
I caught part of it on TV and heard someone referencing Timothy. I was moderately gobsmacked - I'm so used to this being a secular country with a smattering of religious folks that biblical references during a Parliamentary session was incredibly jarring.
For us wordwatchers, "carpeted" is very interesting as (presumably) a shorter "called on the carpet."
Also, looking at the comments, I wouldn't mind at all if "gobsmacked" gains currency in the USA.
I too would like to know exactly what Christians are praying for? Do they want the crisis to end and normality to ensue or do they want the crisis to continue through to the end of the world. If the latter, are we talking next week, next year, next century? What? How long are each of the days in "the end of days"?
And if all this was prophecised, why is any Christian trying to do anything about it at all? If it's inerrant prophecy it'll happen whether they pray for normality, armageddon, a Ferrari or whatever.
And why would Bidgood waste another day in a decision-making job when he apparently believes we have no control over anything anyway because everything was decided thousands of years ago when God made humans with built-in obsolescence? Why not just stay home and pray - for something(?) - and let God take care of it as the bible predicts he will anyway?
It all makes no sense whatsoever. Every answer to every question just sees another, more ludicrous paradox unfold.
This man sits in our parliament.