Stones Cry Out

I'm sooooo sick of Pat Robertsons rantings... he is making the church look like a bunch of pharasitic idiots. Oh yeah, lets pronounce judgement on somone because we have a television outlet. Why can't this just be a blood clot? Why can't Pat see that God can use this for progress in Israel? When is Pat going to see that the Christian community is embarrassed by him and that we spend more time apologizing and trying to smooth over the rediculous things he says to non believers than we do witnessing to them? How many souls have been lost because of lost opportunities because of his mouth? *sigh*

It's easy to pick on Pat Robertson because he has made some mistakes in the past.

But actually Robertson's words line up with scripture, and also with Hal Lindsey and David Dolan in their articles on WND.com today.

And as for your statement about knowing the mind of God - scripture does state that we should know the mind of Christ. And what are prophets for if not to know the mind of God - right?

I'd be very careful about joining the crowd of people who want to throw darts at Pat Robertson.

Who knows maybe he is a type of Jeremiah. And then, that would make you a Hananiah.

Larry

Knowing God's mind (e.g. His love for Israel) is quite different than saying that you know God's motivation behind this specific event. We know God's priorities, but we don't know how He goes about fulfilling them. Robertson, same as you and I, can only say "maybe".

Someday, in retrospect, if you can point to a series of events including this one and suggest that God was behind them, you may have a case. All I'm saying is that right now, it's too early to pass judgement on this. You can have whatever opinion you wish on whether or not the Gaza pullout was good or bad, right or wrong. But to say that this single incident is specific punishment from God for it is way, way too premature.

The ScrappleFace item links to this passage from Luke 13, with verse 4 bolded as below:

1 Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? 3 "I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. 4 "Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? 5 "I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."

Ronni writes: When is Pat going to see that the Christian community is embarrassed by him and that we spend more time apologizing and trying to smooth over the rediculous things he says to non believers than we do witnessing to them?

How about when there aren't any major television civil affairs programs that will invite him on to be a guest to represent the views of evangelical Christians, because every time they have him on the air, their producers are deluged with complaints from evangelicals that they are being misrepresented?

If Pat Robertson is so unrepresentative of evangelical Christians, then why don't you find someone less embarrassing to represent you in the media? Hint: Jerry Falwell, Lou Sheldon and D. James Kennedy aren't any less embarrassing.

Who do we send nominations to, and is anyone listening? The media go to the same old folks every time mostly out of laziness. Women's issue? Talk to NOW, even though the conservative "Concerned Women for America" is as large or larger.

You're blaming us for the media's choices, even though we don't have a say in them. Rather unhelpful.

Doug Payton writes: Who do we send nominations to, and is anyone listening?

You're being disingenuous again. You know perfectly well where to send your complaints about media portrayal. Evangelicals have mounted a nearly endless series of political campaigns to influence media coverage and portrayal of issues near and dear to the evangelical heart. Don't tell me you've suddenly forgotten where to send the letters.

The more interesting question is this: who could better represent you in the media than Pat Robertson?

When you have an answer to that, you'll know what names to drop in those complaint letters you should be writing.

Evangelicals have mounted a nearly endless series of political campaigns to influence media coverage and portrayal of issues near and dear to the evangelical heart.

And yet they still quote Robertson. You make my point. No one's listening.

I just think he's showing dementia. It happens to a lot of people. Fortunately for most, though, they don't experience or show signs of dementia in front of a million people on tv every day. The crazier his statements get, the more press they will get from the media who lives to be Christian-bashers.

Jerry Falwell, Lou Sheldon and D. James Kennedy aren't any less embarrassing.

I agree, and I'm tired of "big name" preachers being the measuring stick and only voices mentioned for all of Christianity. There are thousands of excellent Godly men out there that aren't being used because Satan uses the stupidity and big mouthedness of people like Jerry Falwell to keep our eyes of TRUTH. As long as we are arguing about the old guard of the church and their "declarations" to the media... we take our focus off Christ. Isn't that his whole purpose? To keep our eyes off Christ?

Enough with this "movement" Christianity where everyone has to align themselves with some kind of current theology... like the prayer of Jabez movement or the newest Joel Osteen book... Christ wouldn't have been a part of that... he would be quietly serving the poor and downtrodden around him... he would be serving his brothers and sisters in his town, he would be holding my hand when I was hurting and he would NOT be the one looking to stand in front of a TV camera and professing to gain fame in front of the secular world.

Larry, for those who know me know that I don't have to worry about being Hananiah. What Robertson is doing is unbiblical to begin with. If he has a word from God for Arafat, he has the ear of the president, and he could ge word to Arafat. Just like if I saw someone in my church sinning, I don't just spout it out in front of the whole congregation. I take it to that person, if they don't listen, I take it to that person with a friend, and if they still don't listen I take it to the elders of the church. In this instance, I would have written something to him and made sure it was delivered to him and prayed for him. Ranting about him and bashing him on worldwide television is in no way helping Arafat or his soul. God cares about souls, even Arafat's and to have a Christian leader saying that he had a stroke as judgement, only exaserbates the problem. I guess if Pat Robertson knew that I am a cancer patient, he would say it's because of some sin that he finds in my life (perhaps because I'm impatient at times or I speed occasionally, I don't know...) but I hate to perpetuate the theolody behind the whole "your sick because you sin" movement... we are sick because of the human condition and the fall of man.. because of origional sin... not always is the sickness of a person because of something they specifically did.

Anyhow now I'm just rambling and on only 4 hours sleep so I'm done for now.. LOL

I meant Sharon... sorry... I need sleep....

Doug Payton writes: You make my point. No one's listening.

And yet, where are the calls for media organizations to stop using Pat Robertson to represent the views of evangelical Christians? It's not that no one is listening— it's that no one is complaining.

Get up off your duffs and start insisting that Pat Robertson is not one of yours, that he doesn't speak for you, and that you consider media organizations that promote him as representative of your views as unreliable and offensive.

Where is the organized backlash against Pat Robertson? It CERTAINLY isn't coming from the evangelical Christians. Apparently, you're perfectly content to let powerless atheists and pagans do the heavy lifting of exposing the toxic influence of this man on the public discourse. Why is that?

I'll tell you why. You're afraid that if you come out swinging too hard for Pat Robertson in public, you'll open up an industrial sized cartload of ecumenical dirty laundry that evangelicals have been hiding under the bed for generations now.

If you're too cowardly to clean up your own room, I don't see why I should listen to your moralizing about the philosophical untidyness of the broader culture. It's time for evangelicals to purge Pat Robertson from the tent, or explain why they still accept him as one of their own.

For s9 and other like thinkers:

Pat Robertson is my brother.

On his good days, when he walks in perfect holiness before the Lord, he is my brother.

On his bad days, when he fails miserably and sins much, he is my brother.

And whether Ronni or Doug agrees or disagrees with me, they are my sister and brother in Christ.

And like King David, I will not bring abuse on a leader, such as Pat Robertson, that God has raised up.

(Just to add balance for nit pickers, this does not mean that I can not disagree with Pat Robertson. Not everything he says is a "Thus saith the Lord".)

Larry

"Pat Robertson is my brother."

Fine. It sure sounds funny that you're complaining about your brother being an embarrassment to the family, but not enough of an embarrassment to the family to make an intervention necessary.

Meanwhile, Pat Robertson's audience continues to grow at a rate that other daily television program produces can only dream of matching— and you folks want to tell me his influence and status among evangelical Christians is shrinking.

Where's all that new audience coming from if it isn't your evangelical brothers and sisters. Hmmm?