Does Pat Roberson think he is God

[John7]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

this man is not God

 

[greggy53]

…Speak for yourself buddy

I do speak for myself, and what I believe to be the truth for myself. Just as your anger and hatred is yours to bear my faults are mine also to bear. Peace be with you.

 

[greggy53]

http://photos.upi.com/topics-Pat-Robertson/0fee892c4e55e73239eac215d0cbdad3/P.jpg

this man is not God

But he plays God on tv.

 

[Randb]

I have been thinking , [smell something burning?] It seems that we heard something similar when Katrina hit New Orleans, about how God was punishing these sinners etc, is why he allowed these disasters.and now how they made some kind of pack with the devil etc. Well , think about it, these are mostly CATHOLIC areas!!! And these are Baptist preachers making all these claims!!

 

[bridgeforsale]

But he plays God on tv.

he’s almost as scary as the book version

 

[bridgeforsale]

*As so often, the first priest out of the trap on this occasion was that evil moron Pat Robertson, who announced on the Christian Broadcasting Network that Haitians had long ago made an agreement with Satan to enlist diabolic help against French imperialism. The implication was clear … for this offense, God would kill underfed Haitian babies in slums 200 years later. (He would also kill the Archbishop of Port-au-Prince, Joseph Serge Miot, and bring his cathedral down on his head, though since Pat Robertson doesn’t really think that Catholics are proper Christians, there’s perhaps scant irony there.)

Robertson is stupidly trying to channel an event that may have occurred on the night of Aug. 14, 1791, when a large voodoo ceremony is said to have been held by the rebellious slaves of Haiti. After an animal sacrifice (of a black pig) to the maternal spirit of Ezili Danto, all present at Bois Caiman swore to slay their white Christian masters. This is sometimes taken as the signal for the revolt that, under the charismatic leadership of Toussaint L’Ouverture, drove French troops and slaveholders from Haiti and established the world’s first black republic. (The essential book here is The Black Jacobins, by Trinidadian author C.L.R. James.) Americans have good reason to be thankful for that outcome, because it was the vanquishing of Napoleon that enabled celebrated agnostic Thomas Jefferson to negotiate the Louisiana Purchase and double the size of the United States.*

slate.com/id/2241877/?from=rss

Hitchens hits the mark square on; as usual.

 

[greggy53]

Ya know your rude behavior isn’t winning any points with anyone on this forum. The more you talk the less I listen.

 

[bridgeforsale]

Ya know your rude behavior isn’t winning any points with anyone on this forum. The more you talk the less I listen.

You talking to me? If so … I was citing Hitchens, not my words. But I’m curious, what was rude about the Hitchens’ comment exactly (it was a smear of Pat Robertson’s recent stupid remarks regarding Haiti, and notes Robertson’s disdain for Catholicism).

 

[theresab]

Hi all. Here is my 2 cents. I believe it is important to make sure we don’t just believe something we read, see or hear… that way if we comment on it there isn’t false witness being brought against our neighbor (in this case Pat Robertson). I read CBN’s statement because I wondered what the truth was. (Ever seen a Catholic leader misquoted?) What I have seen on the internet about Pat Robertson doesn’t seem to match what his network says. (I didn’t see the show) I saw in this thread CBN’s statement about what was said by Pat Robertson…please consider reading it to see what his network is saying.
God please guide us to your truth.
May God bless all of us…Blessed are the peace makers for they shall be called children of God.

 

[Good_Fella]

If you really think this wins the day, then what can I say. You’re argument is along these lines. God can do anything he wants, therefore he can kill, destroy, wreak havoc, and commit any act no matter how horrific and we’re obligated to trod along thinking this monstrosity is a perfectly good, loving spirit who only has our best interests at heart.

I submit that’s* hog wash on its face* (a new legal term for you). If you wanted to say god is incapable of murder because he can’t interact with the physical world in that way (for instance, rather than create ex nihilo god created us through a long process beginning at some point close to the initiation of the big bang, through the billions year process of biological evolution, and continuing, which might indicate some real limitations on god’s power). But no; rather you try and feed me the ridiculous proposition (supported by a scribbling from Job) that god can simply do whatever he wants, kill what he pleases, for any particular reason he wishes, and we should shut up and like it.

Here’s a perfect example of why I can’t be religious; it seems to me accepting this sort of absurd reasoning, is gullible and stupid (there’s really no better way to put it).

I’d rather think that god is incapable of murder because he’s actually incapable of murder. In fact I submit the only way to philosophically alleviate culpability from god for our general condition (and the horrors we suffer from war, terror, natural disasters, disease, famine, tyranny, and even mortality in a general sense) is to say god is physically incapable of interacting with the physical world in the way necessary to prevent these occurrences.

In other words, if god is omnipotent, then it strains credibility to call him our friend. And this doesn’t even begin to explore an idea like god created a race he knew would be depraved, with the ultimate intention of coming to earth in bodily form, and ensure he would be executed in his early 30’s at some belated attempt at a vicarious blood ritual sacrifice. Plainly said, it reduces to the absurd; and it’s not only the story itself that’s absurd, but it reduces god to the absurd. I simply can’t imagine an infinite, ultimately intelligent god or god like figure, would concoct such an insane and senseless plan, when it’s much more logical to think this is a bad invention of the ancient imagination (who in his primitiveness liked blood sacrifices, martyrdom, and all that sort of nonsense).

There might be some redeeming value in religion, but reasonableness and an accurate rendition of history aren’t among them I can assure you.

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written: I will catch the wise in their own craftiness.
1 Corinthians 3, 19

I have the distinct impression that you like to flatter yourself, what with this laborious diatribe of yours. You understand far less than you think regardless of the esteem you place on your own reasoning.

A brutish man knoweth not, neither doth a fool understand.
Psalm 96, 2

PAX :heaven:

 

[AmateurPianist]

and notes Robertson’s disdain for Catholicism).

Again…not that I am an apologist for Pat Robertson, but is it true that Robertson disdains Catholicism? Hitchens say so is not proof.

I have never gotten the sense that Robertson disdains Catholicism in the same sense your local independend, separatist, fundamentalist, kjv only, Bible Baptist church does.

 

[bridgeforsale]

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written: I will catch the wise in their own craftiness.
1 Corinthians 3, 19

I have the distinct impression that you like to flatter yourself, what with this laborious diatribe of yours. You understand far less than you think regardless of the esteem you place on your own reasoning.

A brutish man knoweth not, neither doth a fool understand.
Psalm 96, 2

PAX :heaven:

So I should find the fact that the myth makers who wrote the bible anticipated obvious objections, profound

 

[bridgeforsale]

Again…not that I am an apologist for Pat Robertson, but is it true that Robertson disdains Catholicism? Hitchens say so is not proof.

I have never gotten the sense that Robertson disdains Catholicism in the same sense your local independend, separatist, fundamentalist, kjv only, Bible Baptist church does.

Yes Robertson has made numerous anti-Catholic comments in his career (but it’s been a while, I’d say over the last decade or so he’s been more accomidating to Catholics given interfaith efforts in areas like opposing abortion).

 

[Good_Fella]

First GF, man you sure gave me plenty to respond to (you have quite a bit of writing energy my friend). Anyway, to the substance.

This ultimately presents a chicken or the egg paradox (how can god have foreseen something, allowed it to happen, and not be responsible for it - given he not only maintained the power to alter events, but also put those events in motion in the first place). We wouldn’t apply this sort of logic to anything else would we? Why should religiosity get a special pleading?

The suffering in this life is a consequence of Adam and Eve’s free disobedience to God. As I said before, suffering and death are concommitant of our inclination to disobey and offend God. Because of sin, we are subject to the universal penalty of death and the suffering which it entails. We are morally responsible for our personal transgressions in our weak and wounded human nature, so we mustn’t expect to be immune to the temporal punishments that we deserve because of our sins. But in his love and mercy God has ordered things so that our suffering and death may hold redemptive value for ourselves. We do not suffer and die in vain, for Jesus Christ has made it possible for us to offer up our suffering and death as acts of atonement for our sins in and through Him as active participants in the redemption of mankind.

God could have created us without the promise of eternal glory. As a result of Adam and Eve’s transgression, our frailty and mortality could have been confined here without a future hope for us. However, God permitted the fall of man to happen so that a greater good could be realized. If God does not love us, he could have either refrained from creating us or deny us eternal life by witholding his grace. If we patiently endure in our suffering and offer it up in reparation for our sins, then by our oblations we shall be sanctified and merit our heavenly reward because of God’s mercy. God loves us, so he tempers his justice with his mercy. He could have just wiped Adam and Eve out of existence and forget about making a promise to us about a better life. God had every right to do so in his justice.

I rejoice in my sufferings, and in my afflictions I make up for what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ.
Colossians 1, 24

We should bear in mind that God is no indifferent spectator in the order of redemption. God showed his love for us by becoming man and sharing in our fallen state of suffering and death. And by becoming man, God exemplified what true love means: sacrificing oneself for the welfare of a friend even to the point of laying down one’s life. Now that we have freely rejected God and his grace by our free disobedience, it is up to us to prove our love by willingly suffering and offering up our lives to God as acts of reparation. This is the only sure path towards reconciliation with God. We the faithful shall be rewarded with the glory of eternal life, in which suffering and death shall be no more, provided we humbly accept our suffering and death in total abandonment to divine providence and place our childlike trust and confidence in God’s justice and mercy, conscious of the need of our making reparation to God for our offences. If there is no God, then our suffering and death are in vain; God’s justice and mercy amount to nothing more than fine catchwords in religious parlance.

If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is in vain.
1 Corinthians 15, 14

PAX :heaven:

 

[Lutheranteach]

I have a hard time with the words Pat Robertson and thought being used in the same sentence.

 

[bridgeforsale]

The suffering in this life is a consequence of Adam and Eve’s free disobedience to God.

When did this Adam & Eve event happen exactly? Was it 6,000 years ago in a magical garden, where snakes could talk? Did god snap his holy fingers and poof, up from a pile of clay or dirt jumped some guy he named Adam, and then in his divine foresight figured Adam needed some female companionship?

Or is all this a metaphore for creation, beginning with the quantum fluctuation (or whatever it was that triggered the inflation we call the big bang), culminating with the random (but according to religionists mysteriously guided) creation of biological life by first creating simple oganisims in a primordian soup, then through a slow three billion year process, the creation of human beings through natural selection (a completely random process of trial and error that resulted in the extinction of over 99.9% of all species that have ever existed)?

Should I go with the volumes of scientific data, millions of pieces of fossil evidence, thousands of celestial observations proving the age of our universe, geological data that is irrefutable, data collected from our DNA that shows our common ancestory with other primates, etc.? Or should I believe a collection of handed down stories, taken from copies, of copies, of (you guessed it) yet more copies, of ancient scribble even biblical experts can’t agree on; for which not a drop of correborating evidence exists, which is so inconsistant it’s unimaginable to think an omnipotent and omniscient god could have created it.

But oh yeah, Paul warned you guys about people like me

As I said before, suffering and death are concommitant of our inclination to disobey and offend God. Because of sin, we are subject to the universal penalty of death and the suffering which it entails.

Sure there’s that’s one option; OR the primative illiterate (or semi-literate) desert nomads who came up with this stuff just wrote a stupid story? I’m going with option B

We are morally responsible

We agree on something

in our weak and wounded human nature,

I don’t feel wounded. Little factoid, during the first century period where Christianity grew up, about 75% of all people were slaves. And you can see the fingerprints of a slave mentality all over this religion. We’re poor, wounded, sinners, who lack any power over our circumstances, bla, bla, bla. It’s pathetic.

so we mustn’t expect to be immune to the temporal punishments that we deserve because of our sins.

It’s either that, or natural selection hasn’t been as effective as we might have liked (and it made us mortal), and perhaps any further advancements in our biology will have to be accomplished through technological developments. With regard to natural disasters like earthquakes, there’s always the fact that continents shift, and sometimes the thin crust of our cooling planet releases energy that creates seismic waves

But in his love and mecy God has ordered things so that our suffering and death may hold redemptive value for ourselves. We do not suffer and die in vain, for Jesus Christ has made it possible for us to offer up our suffering and death as acts of atonement for our sins in and through Him as active participants in the redemption of mankind.

man, do you seriously believe this stuff

God could have created us without the promise of eternal glory.

Or he could have created us as superbeings who never die and don’t sin? But in his vast mercy he created us as a bunch of pathetic slaves who can’t even resist the impulse to sin constantly.

As a result of Adam and Eve’s transgression,

That’s sure a bunch of guilt to lay on one dude (who as it turns out couldn’t have really existed anyway).

our frailty and mortality could have been confined here without a future hope for us. However, God permitted the fall of man to happen so that a greater good could be realized. If God does not love us, he could have either refrained from creating us or deny us eternal life by witholding his grace.

ummm, I won’t say it (I’m already digging a hole here as it is).

If we patiently endure in our suffering and offer it up in reparation for our sins,

You know, I’m just gonna go ahead and stop right here, and shut my pie hole (I don’t think I have anything good to say, so I’ll spare you my rhetorical hammer). I think pehaps agreeing to disagree is in order (but oh yeah, you guys can’t even do that, you have a heavenly mandate to push this nonsense on the world).

 

[Good_Fella]

Imagine if the allies had the ability to stop the war in another, less dreadful way. For instance, assume FDR was GOD; and could wave his magic god wand and poof, Hitler (and all his henchmen) are killed. Or even better, FDR could peer back in time, make sure Hitlers would be father got too drunk the night the old boy had at it with Hilter’s would be mom, and poof Hitler was never born. Or (to add a little amusement here) FDR could have placed a really, really hot Jewish chick (let’s say a hot blonde, blue eyed Jewish girl) next to him in high school (and ensured they became lovers, eventually married, and had a bunch of little half Jewish half Austrian baby Hitlers). Either FDR could choose one of these options or he would be forced to kill hundreds of thousands of German civilians?

:coolinoff:

Well golly that just brings up a whole bunch of other questions doesn’t it? Isn’t it evil for an omnipotent god (who supposedly has the power to prevent horrible atrocities) to not act in the face of something like a Hitler or Stalin? Oh yeah free will right (I guess I wonder what about the free will of their millions of victims, but let’s not complicate things too much, you have a lot of explaining to do already ).

God could have intervened to prevent the likes of Hitler and Stalin from assuming and exercising their terrible power and wreaking havoc in the world, but he didn’t for a mysterious purpose. World War ll could have been prevented by divine intervention, and God would have infalllibly foreseen a different chapter in human history, if only the world had turned back to God by this time. God permitted the evil of Nazism and Communism to temporarily prevail and cause much suffering because of the world’s indifference and aversion towards him. Atheistic and agnostic materialism had reached its peak by 1938 (the annexation of Austria). Suffice it to say, if Hitler and Stalin (Nietzsche’s ubermenschen: I can do whatever I want.) didn’t presume to take the place of God, then all the atrocities and suffering brought about by the 2nd World War and the Cold War would not have happened.

During her apparitions to the three shepherd children at the Cove of Irene at Fatima, Portugal in 1917, the Blessed Virgin Mary warned us what would happen unless the human race as a whole turned back to God in faith:

“The war [WW1] is going to end soon, but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius Xl. When you see the night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given to you by God that He is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father.”

Fact: On the 25th of January, 1938, a remarkable display of aurora borealis was visible across Europe, as far south as Galicia Spain. By an “unknown light” our Lady meant that this natural phenomenon would serve as a sign heralding the outbreak of WWll oblivious to all until after the seer Lucia had made the secret known to the world after the war. God does not threaten us. He desires that we turn back to him in complete liberty of will under no coercion. A true child of promise refuses to offend God out of love for him, not out of fear of eternal damnation. And those who love God have no cause for fear of punishment. We know that we love God if we keep his commandments for the sake of his infinite goodness and perfection.

p.s. Catch the new film The 13th Day. At least see the trailer on-line.

PAX :harp:

 

[bridgeforsale]

God could have intervened to prevent the likes of Hitler and Stalin from assuming and exercising their terrible power and wreaking havoc in the world, but he didn’t for a mysterious purpose. World War ll could have been prevented by divine intervention, and God would have infalllibly foreseen a different chapter in human history, if only the world had turned back to God by this time. God permitted the evil of Nazism and Communism to temporarily prevail and cause much suffering because of the world’s indifference and aversion towards him. Atheistic and agnostic materialism had reached its peak by 1938 (the annexation of Austria). Suffice it to say, if Hitler and Stalin (Nietzsche’s ubermenschen: I can do whatever I want.) didn’t presume to take the place of God, then all the atrocities and suffering brought about by the 2nd World War and the Cold War would not have happened.

Come now, let’s not needlessly slander Nietzsche (I think Hitler probably quoted John Chrysostom just as much as he did Nietzsche … but anyway). In fairness, anyone whose truly familiar with Nietzsche (and any good Catholic scholar will admit this in a minute) knows Nietzsche hated bigotry (even ending his friendship with Wagner because of his extreme bigotry).

During her apparitions to the three shepherd children at the Cove of Irene at Fatima, Portugal in 1917, the Blessed Virgin Mary warned us what would happen unless the human race as a whole turned back to God in faith:

Oh man, not the Virgin Mary sighting routine

“The war [WW1] is going to end soon, but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius Xl. When you see the night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given to you by God that He is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father.”

Are we offending god less today? What about Japan who doesn’t believe in god, they’ve done remarkably well over the last several decades, and what about China? I guess consistency is too much to ask for (but of course you can address the consistency problem by simply saying god’s plan is a mystery, or something to that effect, which means we have no way to measure natural disasters, wars, famine, poverty, or the like against any particular divine intention).

Fact: On the 25th of January, 1938, a remarkable display of aurora borealis was visible across Europe, as far south as Galicia Spain. By an “unknown light” our Lady meant that this natural phenomenon would serve as a sign heralding the outbreak of WWll oblivious to all until after the seer Lucia had made the secret known to the world after the war. God does not threaten us. He desires that we turn back to him in complete liberty of will under no coercion. A true child of promise refuses to offend God out of love for him, not out of fear of eternal damnation. And those who love God have no cause for fear of punishment. We know that we love God if we keep his commandments for the sake of his infinite goodness and perfection.

p.s. Catch the new film The 13th Day. At least see the trailer on-line.

PAX :harp:

I don’t doubt some sort of solar event did happen over Portugal that day (but of course solar events happen all the time, in varying degrees of severity, and solar activity is cyclical). A “solar cycle” is eleven years. During these cyclic periods there’s substantial modulation of solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and other geoeffective solar eruptive phenomena (link here). While I’m not a expert on solar activity (and therefore I’m not going to try and offer a dogmatic alternate explanation); I sure the event was the result of natural phenomena (and not a manifestation of divine power or divine anything).

I have a question, why is it that god only seems to appear in desert or southern climates? Nietzsche (since you brought him up) once said southern Europeans have a greater penchant for religion, I would also add middle easterners and Indians into that group. Why don’t we see many god sightings in Scandinavia or China (in fact none I can think of off the top of my head)? This sort of stuff only happens in places already predisposed to believing bizarre things. Not a conclusive fact, rather just another relevant fact on the pile.

 

[murtad]

I wish I was god’s lawyer (I’d sue Pat Robertson for slander).

god’s lawyers are called religious leaders. You can never be a Pope, a Patriarch, or a Bishop! Right to ex communicate a person is reserved to the Synod.

 

[bridgeforsale]

god’s lawyers are called religious leaders. You can never be a Pope, a Patriarch, or a Bishop! Right to ex communicate a person is reserved to the Synod.

If bishops and popes represent god, then I’m afraid god is a negligent employer.