Friday, January 06, 2006

Pat Robertson Ticks Me Off [Rant]

I do my best not to comment on political/religious things here, unless they have something to do with electronics. I can't resist posting about this, though.

It seems Pat Robertson has some sort of Red-Phone with God. He makes these bold, flashy statements that garner all kinds of (the wrong) attention.
“He was dividing God's land, and I would say, 'Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America.'”
Does using archaic terms like “woe” make one more Godly? If so, I better get on that right away.

As a Christian myself, I am embarrassed at this type of insensitivity, not only toward Sharon himself, but toward the entire political process. How does this do ANYONE any good? Does he say these things to show off his staunch (read: stench) conservatism? Or is it just ratings he is concerned about?

He comes off as the nicest guy in the world, and he probably is, except he apparently has no control over his tongue. And that, according to my Bible is as bad, or worse than anything Sharon has done.

I am horrified at the way he represents Christianity to the world in such a public manner. Jesus did use very strong words against some people, but those words were directed at persons who were “whitewashed tombs,” not purely political leaders; Jesus even respected the government (much to the chagrin of the Pharisees) by saying; “Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.”

A whitewashed tomb; what a picture. It is beautiful--eye catching on the outside. It sits on a hill in the cemetery, and catches the suns rays, gleaming in the warm light. Inside, though: Death, decay, rot, filth, stench. It is a remembrance of a person who has passed from this life to the next.

Maybe Robertson is right; maybe God has used his power to take away Sharon's place in government. But that is none of Robertson's business (with the plausible, yet unlikely--in this case--exception of Robertson being a prophet from God). The book of Job clearly states that no man can know the mind of God.

The ironic thing is that when Robertson falls ill, the ultra-conservative sector of Christianity will not say anything of this sort about him. They will say: “Our prayers and thoughts are with Pat Robertson and his family. Blah, blah, blah. We know that God is in control. Blah, blah.”

On this Robertson isn't just wrong, he is misrepresenting the truth. It is like he is looking into a curved mirror and believing that is how he looks in real life. Maybe I should not mix my metaphors, and just say that he is a tomb with a fresh bucket of white paint, and a nice big paintbrush in hand.
Robertson spokeswoman Angell Watts: “What they're basically saying is, 'How dare Pat Robertson quote the Bible?' This is what the word of God says. This is nothing new to the Christian community.”
What callous insensitivity (not to mention blatant misuse of Scripture, and lack of faith that God will work on His own timeline). If my Christian friend were living in some consistent state of sin, and I knew of it, then that friend suddenly fell ill, I would go to that friend in private and confront them--gently. This is the appropriate action; not to go in public and say: “That man is a sinner, and he is damned by God.” Nothing could be more self-serving, self-rightious, and divisive.

From an article on

Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized Robertson's comments Thursday, saying the televangelist “has a political agenda for the entire world.”

“He seems to think God is ready to take out any world leader who stands in the way of that agenda,” Lynn said in a written statement.

“A religious leader should not be making callous political points while a man is struggling for his life,” he said. “I'm appalled.”

Ralph Neas, president of liberal advocacy group People for the American Way, said “it is astonishing that Pat Robertson still wields substantial influence” in the Republican Party.

“Once again, Pat Robertson leaves us speechless with his insensitivity and arrogance,” Neas said in a written statement.
These comments could not be more right.

[Update 1/12/06:]

Today there is another article on with another development:

The Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the 30 million-member National Association of Evangelicals, said the controversy “is a blow to evangelical-Israeli relations -- and the situation is unfortunate.” He said for the project to move forward, evangelical leaders “must exercise sensitivity and grace towards the people and leadership of the nation of Israel.”
[Update 1/13/06:]

Now he has written a letter of apology to Sharon's son. Of course, this is only after the Israeli government has threatened to disinvolve him from a pet project. There is a video of his apology speech there as well--he did not sell me, though.

No comments:

Post a Comment