Pat Robertson: “Don’t turn to God if you need help”

[jochhejaam]

[QUOTE]

Look, no matter what your interpretation is, defending Pat Robertson is similar to arguing that the KKK might have some kind of valid cause when they assemble.

No comparison between the two Spurm, be reasonable when making comparisons please.

We'd all be better of if he were simply ignored.

Except for the hundreds of thousands of starving people he provides food and other necessities for year in and year out.

[exstatic]

His worse crime was that he suggested the US should assasinate Hugo Chavez.(HE didnt say he'd do it under his own will. That is unlawful since a christian personally is not supposed to take vengeance into his own hands.)

So, he wants others to do his dirty work? That is soooo weak.

Screw perceptions. If Robertson because of his faith cannot have a political oppinion asking of a removal of state, then that means that if an evangelical were to win office, he'd have to recuse himself if we were attacked by a nation and had to retaliate... Because after all, doesn't the bible say to "turn the other cheek."
This is ridiculous.

He wasn't "asking of a removal of state". He wanted a man dead. And just what the is wrong with turning the other cheek? WWJD?

[gtownspur]

^^A military coupe! whatever. He didnt personally want him dead, he wanted him dead for US interest.

And finally, Turning the other cheek is fine in your personal life. When one is in charge of a nation, that's totally different.

But it's pointless, your probably indifferent towards christianity so whatever anyone tells you wont matter.

Your pointless to discuss with on this topic. you seem to have your mind all made up anyway. Robertson according to you is evil regardless of his statements.

[Spurminator]

No comparison between the two Spurm, be reasonable when making comparisons please.

Be logical when interpreting a valid point. I wasn't comparing Robertson to the KKK, I was comparing defense of the two. Robertson's words have done severe and irreparable damage to Christianity. When smooth-talking Partisans become the Faces of modern Christianity, it does nothing to attract would-be Christians. Furthermore, it alienates those who see through their motives.

And don't give me the crap about feeding starving children. Every moderately powerful person in the history of Civilization has made goodwill gestures to gain support. All of them. But they should be judged by their most significant contributions to society. Robertson's contribution is Republican Propaganda under the disguise of Evangelism. And now that he's getting older and more senile, he's making some really, really STUPID statements. And as a Christian that offends me greatly.

So I fail to see why anyone would jump to his defense, regardless of whether or not he is being misinterpreted. It's like jumping to the defense of the Klan just because you hate the liberals who are opposing them.

Modern Christians have taken God's command not to use His Name in vain to mean not using phrases like "god damn"... But I believe God is much more offended by those who use His Name for blatant political and self-promoting propaganda. That is true vanity.

[gtownspur]

^^He hasn't said anything that is outside of christian doctrine that would portray christianity in a wrong way. If he has, prove it.

[jochhejaam]

[QUOTE]

Be logical when interpreting a valid point. I wasn't comparing Robertson to the KKK, I was comparing defense of the two. Robertson's words have done severe and irreparable damage to Christianity.

Oh really? How so?

Being a part of the Christian community I would have a better take on whether he has done irreparable damage and he has done nothing of the sort.
(I see later on where you too claim to be a part of that community)

When smooth-talking Partisans become the Faces of modern Christianity, it does nothing to attract would-be Christians. Furthermore, it alienates those who see through their motives.

It only alienates those who already have a jaded opinion of his ministry for Christ and devotion to the tenents of Christianity.

And don't give me the crap about feeding starving children. Every moderately powerful person in the history of Civilization has made goodwill gestures to gain support.

His ministry of providing for those in need is done without ceasing, that is on a daily basis, far more than a gesture in any reasonable persons opinion (which you obviously are not).
His throwing out an occasional opinion that the far left enjoy bashing or taking him to task on in no way diminishes the success of his mission.

You can't see the trees for the forest because you don't choose to do so.
Inobjectivity at its finest!

All of them. But they should be judged by their most significant contributions to society.

That would be providing for those that would literally be starving to death if not for his ministries intercession.
A few personal opinions hardly offset that fact Spurm.

Robertson's contribution is Republican Propaganda under the disguise of Evangelism. And now that he's getting older and more senile, he's making some really, really STUPID statements. And as a Christian that offends me greatly.

His views don't offend me at all, on the other hand I take great exception to at least one of your views Spurm.

So I fail to see why anyone would jump<ing> to his defense, regardless of whether or not he is being misinterpreted. It's <is> like jumping to the defense of the Klan just because you hate the liberals who are opposing them.

As I stated previously, you juxtapositioning the two is absurd, unconscionable and incredulous!

Modern Christians have taken God's command not to use His Name in vain to mean not using phrases like "god damn"... But I believe God is much more offended by those who use His Name for blatant political and self-promoting propaganda. That is true vanity

His views are much less extreme than yours it's just that his ministry is Worldwide and because of that his views are magnified.
He need not maintain a code of silence because of that.

[DarkReign]

Religous zealots scare me. This thread just got weird...

[jochhejaam]

Religous zealots scare me. This thread just got weird...

Did you even bother to read the thread le?

Bah! What, were you expecting everyone to join in on the "Let's Bash Robertson Bandwagon"?

If you're scared by an opinion that differs from yours then "frankly this forum probably isn't for you". -ES-

[gtownspur]

Religous zealots scare me. This thread just got weird...

Good! Go and hide like the lightweight you are.

If you think we're advocating a theocracy, that's your own ignorance.

[DarkReign]

Gtown, you heavy-weight gangster you, I have been threatened endlessly by online e-peens like yours before.

Do you really think you are original or funny? Do you truly think you intimidate me in some shape or form? Save it dude.

-------

So quick to judge! My, my...sensitive issue with you? No one jumped on your throat. Damn, calm down...

Yes, Pat Robertson is a religous zealot. So are the people who support him and his asinine views. Those kinds of sheeple scare me because they seem to be reproducing at an alarming rate. What to do? When reason and logic fall on the deaf ears of the devout, how does one move forward?

Whatever...like I said...the thread got weird. You can have fun arguing the virtues of a nut-job like Robertson and only look at all the wonderful things hes done for people. But only for people who accept Jesus Christ as their savior, of course. Always a caveat with his graciousness. Surely to be rewarded from a truly virtuous God, Im sure.

Fallacies abound! Aghast!

Does my opinion bother you? I certainly hope not.

[smeagol]

If Robertson because of his faith cannot have a political oppinion asking of a removal of state,

To some people (that would be gtownspur and the likes), reading about somebody saying such and such head of state should be removed is not a shocker at all. That speaks volumes of how some Americans view international relations and what America can or cannot do in the international arena.

I find it a shock that a politician would suggest the US should assassinate a democratically elected president, even if the president is Chavez, whom I despise (my views on Chavez are do ented on various other threads in this political forum). Particularly because Venezuela is not an enemy of the US (unless they are part of the axis of evil and nobody told me).

You and joch are willing to overlook that a man of God is calling for this assassination because he feeds the hungry.

I don’t agree with your point of view.

[gtownspur]

Your oppinion bothers me as much as mine freaks you out.

YOu have no clue about Pat Robertson. As far as reason and logic go, we already discussed that about his actions. We discussed them already on this board ad naseum and if you wish to refute them go right ahead.

Robertson's words are theologically sound when he spoke to the residents of Dover. He was just stating that you can't take God for granted. Nothing he said was taken out of line in a biblical sense. IF you don't like that, then your the sensitive one. People need to be told the truth and not be coddled and massaged.

Whats nutty about you is your own statement about Roberts only feeding Christian Children. That right there showed your antichristian bias and ignorance.

Like I said, you want to refute his words in a theological sense, go ahead.

IF you want to refute his words in a cons utional sense, right on.

But don't bring your 8th grade stoner "all evangelicals are nazis" argument. You can think all you want, but since you proclaim to be independent and nonpartisan, i'm calling you on your bs.

[Oh, Gee!!]

IF you want to refute his words in a cons utional sense, right on.

how does one refute somebody's words in a "cons utional" sense? You sure love to throw that word around as though you know what it means.

[gtownspur]

To some people (that would be gtownspur and the likes), reading about somebody saying such and such head of state should be removed is not a shocker at all. That speaks volumes of how some Americans view international relations and what America can or cannot do in the international arena.

I find it a shock that a politician would suggest the US should assassinate a democratically elected president, even if the president is Chavez, whom I despise (my views on Chavez are do ented on various other threads in this political forum). Particularly because Venezuela is not an enemy of the US (unless they are part of the axis of evil and nobody told me).

You and joch are willing to overlook that a man of God is calling for this assassination because he feeds the hungry.

I don’t agree with your point of view.

First of all, if Robertson is a politician, i'd gladly like to know what office he occupies. Second, Hugo CHavez has stated that he supports alqueda and wouldn't care if they attacked us. Maybe you think rulers like that deserve a state dinner with a roast, but we crazy americans don't tolerate that nonsense. Robertson is a Christian first and an American second. He just stated what anybody whose aware of the situation has been advocating.

[gtownspur]

how does one do refute somebody's words in a "cons utional" sense? You sure love to throw that word around as though you know what it means.

Well, If he has been advocating a threat (like in the case of DOver, hugo is another story.)like many people have suggested, then he is going way of above and beyond free speech.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Well, If he has been advocating a threat like many people have suggested, then he is going way of above and beyond free speech.

I think he should be arrested and put to death

[gtownspur]

^^And i think, anyone who wants america's defeat abroad should be castrated along with those who make idiotic statements like yours. But....I'm only kidding just like you are.

[DarkReign]

Your oppinion bothers me as much as mine freaks you out.

YOu have no clue about Pat Robertson. As far as reason and logic go, we already discussed that about his actions. We discussed them already on this board ad naseum and if you wish to refute them go right ahead.

Robertson's words are theologically sound when he spoke to the residents of Dover. He was just stating that you can't take God for granted. Nothing he said was taken out of line in a biblical sense. IF you don't like that, then your the sensitive one. People need to be told the truth and not be coddled and massaged.

Whats nutty about you is your own statement about Roberts only feeding Christian Children. That right there showed your antichristian bias and ignorance.

Like I said, you want to refute his words in a theological sense, go ahead.

IF you want to refute his words in a cons utional sense, right on.

But don't bring your 8th grade stoner "all evangelicals are nazis" argument. You can think all you want, but since you proclaim to be independent and nonpartisan, i'm calling you on your bs.

I dont claim to be anything. I am non-partisan.

Overly religious people are by far the most dangerous men and women in all the world (imo). Pat Robertson caters to, and intentionally or unintentionally, has become the voice of the radically religious (both those on the right and left...religious hedonism bound not by political leanings).

Yes, I do in fact despise those who follow without question or curiosity. So sure that the words long written down were in fact the words of Jesus without ever so much as a batting of their eyes at the very concept of it all. So self-important and ego-manical that they become almost violent at the very conjecture that man just MAY have misinterpreted what was actually said. Or (OMG!) actually lied about what was said to further their postion in their culture.

Humans are by far the most defunct, caniving, hateful breed of animal the world has/will ever see. To think the purity of God's word could actually be held onto by the vile filth that is humanity for thousands of years without it being re-interpreted or re-invented all together is naive (to be nice). Along the way, as is with all things, men were in power who would not bow to the glory of God, but think it possible that His glory be bent to him.

And alllllll the while, which cultures peretuated Christianity as we know it? The same vengeful, hateful, crusading Kings who thought the world was their oyster. The same men who had popes killed for any number of reasons. The same thing happens to any centralized ins ution based on theology. The intent may be divine, but the execution of those words can never be realized in the hands of man. Much, much too flawed.

So, in my limited understanding of the divine, would God approve of ONLY feeding the poor who accept Christ as their savior? Because thats what PR does, man. Its a furthering of his CHURCH'S cause, not the cause of God. The two are mutually exclusive. Church craves money and power, currying favor, and delineating the actual path of righteousness. The hungry masses are worth nothing to the Church unless they proclaim faith and maybe one day donate 10% of their lively-hood to them. Who do you think originated the very idea of Big Business? Do some research...the Church has been the biggest business since its inception. It will ocntinue to be with the likes of you rolling the earth in search of some society-accepted truth about why youre here. So desperate for meaning, but not ANY meaning, a meaning by which you can be accepted, and share, and conform. A meaning that others believe as well, so as not to look different, or practice different beliefs. These arent the pressures of your God...these are the pressures of man. From cave to the grave, men create Gods of one sort or another, they just didnt have a pen and paper handy to write it all down like Christians did. Lord knows the only reason you, Gtownspur, are Christian is not because Jesus saved and God forgives, its because Guttenberg created the worlds first printing press and he just so happened to be a Christian with King James' Bible (notice the King James, why dont you surprise yourself and look up why it was called that....then tell me the bible was never re-interpeted). Mass proliferation of idea.

They arent giving things away for free. Never free. Nothing is free. Always a caveat. IMO, do not use the Lord's name in vein never meant the use your mother taught you it was. No, it means do not use His name as a tool for the furthering a man-made agenda. Do not put His name on a banner of War. Do not use His name on the price of food for the hungry. etc.

These things you wont understand because you have been brainwashed by mankind. I am brainwashed by man, we all are. Some more than others. We all bend to society's nuances. That is a creation of man. But I believe EVERYTHING begs to be questioned. ALL things. Even the generationally accepted concepts of religion. Specifically, those very subjects. So many of the worlds problems start and end with the differences between Gods' worshipped, it behooves us to think that those problems will be solved by the more fervent solidification of our own value/religious system.

Thats where I lose my patience. ALL things BEG to be questioned. Without questions, what have we truly learned?

[smeagol]

First of all, if Robertson is a politician, i'd gladly like to know what office he occupies.

You don’t need to be part of the Government to be a politician. He ran in the Republican Primaries in ’88. That makes him a politician. He is also one of the many voices of the Republican Party, very much like J. Jackson is one of the many voices of the Democratic Party. Therefore, he is a politician.

Second, Hugo CHavez has stated that he supports alqueda and wouldn't care if they attacked us.

Chavez is an imbecile. That does not mean he has to be assassinated by the CIA. Please drill this into your thick head: It’s not America’s business to assassinate every leader that does not agree with its policies. If anybody should kill this guy, it should be the Venezuelans. How the would you feel if foreigners whacked W?

Maybe you think rulers like that deserve a state dinner with a roast

Link?

I can link the hundreds of times I’ve said this guy is a nutjob, which obviously means I don’t think he deserves a state dinner with a roast.

Robertson is a Christian first and an American second. He just stated what anybody whose aware of the situation has been advocating.

Who else aside from you and Robertson advocate that the US go ahead and kill a sovereign country’s president?

[Marcus Bryant]

You know, this is like taking anything Michael Moore, Jesse, etc...says seriously. One side's true believers are going to make it out to be something significant, while most sane peeps could care less.

[Marcus Bryant]

Oh yeah, and before I forget, if you are going to abscribe to a faith all of its perceived faults, then you might as add in all of it's positives while you're at it.

[gtownspur]

I dont claim to be anything. I am non-partisan.

Overly religious people are by far the most dangerous men and women in all the world (imo). Pat Robertson caters to, and intentionally or unintentionally, has become the voice of the radically religious (both those on the right and left...religious hedonism bound not by political leanings).

Yes, I do in fact despise those who follow without question or curiosity. So sure that the words long written down were in fact the words of Jesus without ever so much as a batting of their eyes at the very concept of it all. So self-important and ego-manical that they become almost violent at the very conjecture that man just MAY have misinterpreted what was actually said. Or (OMG!) actually lied about what was said to further their postion in their culture.

Humans are by far the most defunct, caniving, hateful breed of animal the world has/will ever see. To think the purity of God's word could actually be held onto by the vile filth that is humanity for thousands of years without it being re-interpreted or re-invented all together is naive (to be nice). Along the way, as is with all things, men were in power who would not bow to the glory of God, but think it possible that His glory be bent to him.

And alllllll the while, which cultures peretuated Christianity as we know it? The same vengeful, hateful, crusading Kings who thought the world was their oyster. The same men who had popes killed for any number of reasons. The same thing happens to any centralized ins ution based on theology. The intent may be divine, but the execution of those words can never be realized in the hands of man. Much, much too flawed.

So, in my limited understanding of the divine, would God approve of ONLY feeding the poor who accept Christ as their savior? Because thats what PR does, man. Its a furthering of his CHURCH'S cause, not the cause of God. The two are mutually exclusive. Church craves money and power, currying favor, and delineating the actual path of righteousness. The hungry masses are worth nothing to the Church unless they proclaim faith and maybe one day donate 10% of their lively-hood to them. Who do you think originated the very idea of Big Business? Do some research...the Church has been the biggest business since its inception. It will ocntinue to be with the likes of you rolling the earth in search of some society-accepted truth about why youre here. So desperate for meaning, but not ANY meaning, a meaning by which you can be accepted, and share, and conform. A meaning that others believe as well, so as not to look different, or practice different beliefs. These arent the pressures of your God...these are the pressures of man. From cave to the grave, men create Gods of one sort or another, they just didnt have a pen and paper handy to write it all down like Christians did. Lord knows the only reason you, Gtownspur, are Christian is not because Jesus saved and God forgives, its because Guttenberg created the worlds first printing press and he just so happened to be a Christian with King James' Bible (notice the King James, why dont you surprise yourself and look up why it was called that....then tell me the bible was never re-interpeted). Mass proliferation of idea.

They arent giving things away for free. Never free. Nothing is free. Always a caveat. IMO, do not use the Lord's name in vein never meant the use your mother taught you it was. No, it means do not use His name as a tool for the furthering a man-made agenda. Do not put His name on a banner of War. Do not use His name on the price of food for the hungry. etc.

These things you wont understand because you have been brainwashed by mankind. I am brainwashed by man, we all are. Some more than others. We all bend to society's nuances. That is a creation of man. But I believe EVERYTHING begs to be questioned. ALL things. Even the generationally accepted concepts of religion. Specifically, those very subjects. So many of the worlds problems start and end with the differences between Gods' worshipped, it behooves us to think that those problems will be solved by the more fervent solidification of our own value/religious system.

Thats where I lose my patience. ALL things BEG to be questioned. Without questions, what have we truly learned?

Excuse me. First of all Robertson is only advocating that intelligent design be taught along evolution. Intelligent design does not negate that evolution occured, only strict Creationist doctrine does. But ofcourse you knew that. Intelligent Design only allows for a broad definition that life on earth, from its primordial soup was the plan of a Creator. Roberstson is not advocating that evolution be taken off. He's not even advocating anything more radical than what the general public believes. Evolution does not awnser the fact whether a Creator did not or did take part in life.


According to your lame argument that christianity is held hostage by only one interpretation, Your acting like i never heard the same tripe. First i proclaim christian due to the fact that The Guttenberg PP has allowed me to be around such knowledge. But the Guttenberg Print wont save me, God's grace will, and it was becuase of GOd's providence that i got to recieve that right to read the bible. BTw I am aware of the KJV's bias in its interpretation, but at that you still have the Young's literal Translation, which does not discredit any of the moral tenets Robertson has.

As for the crusades. Christianity had been taking a beating from Muslims before the Crusades. The muslims raped and pillaged all of North africa and Byzantine up till spain. Christianity only acted in defense at first to all the massacre. Not that Christianity itself was clean of wrongdoing, but it was at first an act of defense to stop the aggression.


To equate advocacy of Intelligent design to a Religous war in which blood is shed, is more proof of your loopy logic.

You said it yourself, that man is the most defunct species on the planet. Yet you want that same man to have absolute control of morality and not being able to awnser to a higher being. You yourself are a contradiction like the same radicals you berate. Need i say Hypocrisy?

[gtownspur]

You don’t need to be part of the Government to be a politician. He ran in the Republican Primaries in ’88. That makes him a politician. He is also one of the many voices of the Republican Party, very much like J. Jackson is one of the many voices of the Democratic Party. Therefore, he is a politician.


Chavez is an imbecile. That does not mean he has to be assassinated by the CIA. Please drill this into your thick head: It’s not America’s business to assassinate every leader that does not agree with its policies. If anybody should kill this guy, it should be the Venezuelans. How the would you feel if foreigners whacked W?


Link?

I can link the hundreds of times I’ve said this guy is a nutjob, which obviously means I don’t think he deserves a state dinner with a roast.


Who else aside from you and Robertson advocate that the US go ahead and kill a sovereign country’s president?

You seem to convenienty skip the fact that he offered aid to Alqueda.

[smeagol]

You seem to convenienty skip the fact that he offered aid to Alqueda.

It's a fact that I was not aware of. Care to link a credible source?

[DarkReign]

Excuse me. First of all Robertson is only advocating that intelligent design be taught along evolution. Intelligent design does not negate that evolution occured, only strict Creationist doctrine does. But ofcourse you knew that. Intelligent Design only allows for a broad definition that life on earth, from its primordial soup was the plan of a Creator. Roberstson is not advocating that evolution be taken off. He's not even advocating anything more radical than what the general public believes. Evolution does not awnser the fact whether a Creator did not or did take part in life.

...

As for the crusades. Christianity had been taking a beating from Muslims before the Crusades. The muslims raped and pillaged all of North africa and Byzantine up till spain. Christianity only acted in defense at first to all the massacre. Not that Christianity itself was clean of wrongdoing, but it was at first an act of defense to stop the aggression.

To equate advocacy of Intelligent design to a Religous war in which blood is shed, is more proof of your loopy logic.

Who in the was talking about (un)Intelligent Design? Wrong thread, dude.

Wow...nevermind...

According to your lame argument that christianity is held hostage by only one interpretation, Your acting like i never heard the same tripe. First i proclaim christian due to the fact that The Guttenberg PP has allowed me to be around such knowledge. But the Guttenberg Print wont save me, God's grace will, and it was becuase of GOd's providence that i got to recieve that right to read the bible. BTw I am aware of the KJV's bias in its interpretation, but at that you still have the Young's literal Translation, which does not discredit any of the moral tenets Robertson has.

Thats typical. No, God did not 'bless' you with the opportunity to read the Bible. Guttenberg mass produced a religious volume, thereby inundating the known world with it and its teachings...there wasnt a divine intervention of any kind. If Guttenberg hadnt, maybe a Muslim of the time would have. If that were the case, you would be ardently defending Ala instead of Jesus. See the fallacy? Oh....wait...youre hardcore Gtown...I forgot....