-
Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Robertson calls for assassination of Venezuela's Chavez
A self-proclaimed Christian calling for the assassination of someone. Is that a Christian thing to say? I'm just curious, not being a Christian. Wouldn't premeditated murder make baby Jesus cry? And yet, people "beeeeleeeev!" and send this idiot large amounts of money to keep spouting his insanity.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Well ... I have seen pretty much the same statement made on this board some time ago.
Does Robertson have relatives on this board, is he a patron himself? ... curious :thinking:
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Oh! Heh, I just tried to imagine Pat Robertson playing MTW. The first time he was invaded by a Muslim nation he'd be off to appear on his TV show calling the guys at CA "tools of the devil" and calling for their assassinations or praying for God to "Take them out" as he did regarding the more liberal members of the U.S. Supreme Court. Imagine him playing the English and getting taken out by the French. That would really chap his ass.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Robertson may be getting senile, but one odd comment certainly does not qualify him as being "the Anti-Christ"
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Just one odd comment?
The man keeps a pad of yellow legal-sized paper and writes down the personal messages frm God on it. I've seen him refer to it on his TV show.
Only one odd comment? Let's see.
He has stated that in a meeting with Bush prior to the invasion of Iraq, the president told him there would be no casualties. A claim the White House denies. For once, I believe the White House.
He has stated on the air that activist judges are more of a threat to America than terrorists.
He said on his show that a small nuke at the State Department in Foggy Bottom would shake things up.
He has said that the Quran teaches violence, which is incorrect. Odd coming from a man who openly espouses the killing of foreign leaders, wouldn't you say? I'm reasonably certain the Christian Bible doesn't allow for that kind of thing. Does it?
Calling him the anti-Christ is hyperbole. Yep. But no more than the hyperble he spouts on an almost daily basis. Senile? No. He's been saying crap like this for years. It isn't senility. It's the person.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
I don't know any more about your anti-Christ than I do about your God, but Robertson's speech merely shows that religiously inspired terrorism is alive in the U.S. and it is not just islamic.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
It's actually quite sad that looneys like him draw that much attention and - due to the air-time they get - have an out-of-proportion share in how people perceive religion, while many others - of all kinds of religions - who quietly and selflessly help other people in the name of their religion (and who represent the spirit of their religions in a more truthful way) often disappear as "background noise".
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
Those quiet altruists offset their value to society by promoting ignorant and backwards notions like Intelligent Design.
That might be the case in the US, but quite frankly, I personally don't know any person, no matter of which religion, who actively promoted, e.g., Intelligent Design.
They might believe in it, but that's completely their business not mine.
Quote:
There would be altruists with or without religion.
Of course there would be, but religions that actually teach and promote altruism are likely to increase the number of altruists.
OTOH, one could argue that somebody like Pat Robertson would very likely be in favour of "taking out" Chavez even if he was an atheist.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Robertson is saying a lot of whacky stuff so i'm not gonna defend him
however i just read the article in full and on this particular point, he is correct:
Quote:
We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."
it certainly is a lot cheaper to assasinate a leader rather than start a war
in fact the USA tried to use missiles to assasinate Saddam at the start of the War on Iraq. and they called it a "decapitation strike" (how ironic is that ~:eek: ). this shows us that USA does indeed place high value on killing leaders ASAP.
note: this is just an observation. i do not mean to imply that anything needs to be done about the guy Robertson is talking about.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Assassination, for purely political reasons, hardly seems "Christian" to me. Then again, I long ago ceased wondering at the inability of self-proclaimed Christians to make their beliefs and reality match up on a one-to-one basis. ~;)
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Ah sterotypical BS about Christianity.
[sarcasm on] Pat Robertson is an idiot most of the time - so then anyone who believes in Christianity is an idiot. [sarcasm off]
The logical of some is just amazing.
Others beside Pat Robertson need some serious :help:
-
Re : Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Me follows Redleg. One "christian" telling BS doesn't mean christianism is about telling BS.
Same error than judging islam from Mohammed Atta, or communism from Stalin.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Thou shalt not kill, unless the son of a bitch is a godless communist or Muslim or pisses you off
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by ichi
Thou shalt not kill, unless the son of a bitch is a godless communist or Muslim or pisses you off
Actually it states something a little different and there is some question concerning the English Interpation of the orginal Hebrew Text.
The King James Verision of the Bible does indeed stated - Thou shall not kill.
A Biblical scholar writes
Quote:
The sixth commandment: You shall not murder
a. Some have wondered how God can approve both capital punishment (Exodus 19:12) and this prohibition of murder. The simple answer is that in Hebrew as well as English, there is a distinction between to kill and to murder
b. Murder is the taking of life without legal justification (execution after due process) or moral justification (killing in defense)
c. Jesus carefully explained the heart of this commandment; it prohibits us from hating another also (Matthew 5:21-26). We can wish someone dead in our hearts, yet never have the "courage" to commit the deed - we aren't to be praised for such a lack of courage, when the heart is filled with hatred!
and then another source that goes back to the Hebrew text of the 10 commandments
Quote:
6th Commandment; Verse 13: "Thou shalt not kill."
The Hebrew word "ratsach" is translated as "kill" in the King James Version, Revised Standard Version, American Standard Version, and some other translations of the Bible. However, it is difficult to apply this in practice. Killing chickens and beef cattle is legal now as it was in biblical times. Nobody today is concerned about pulling vegetables from the garden, even though it kills them. The word "ratsach" is commonly believed to describe the premeditated killing of a human. It requires that the victim be a human being. Many other translations translate "ratsach" as "murder" in this verse.
This Commandment is not absolute. Not all murders are forbidden. Hebrew Scriptures specify many grounds for which this commandment is to be ignored, and a guilty party executed. Persons found guilty of temple prostitution, engaged women who are seduced by a man other than her future husband, women who practice black magic, some women who are raped in urban areas, children who cursed their parents, some non-virgin brides, Jews who collect firewood on Saturday to keep their families from freezing, persons proselytizing in favor of another religion, persons worshiping a deity other than Yahweh, strangers who entered the temple, etc; all were to be executed.
A few centuries ago, it was believed that male sperm contained large numbers of tiny babies which only required a woman's womb to grow and be born. Under that belief system, masturbation could be considered an act of mass murder. We now know that pregnancy requires conception, and that a unique DNA is formed at that time. But society has never reached a consensus on the definition of when human personhood begins. Unfortunately, the Ten Commandments and the rest of the Bible appears to be ambiguous on this matter. Thus, it does not help us decide about when, if ever, abortions are acceptable. If the Bible had defined when the start of personhood occurs, there might not be so much conflict over abortion today.
There are tens of thousands of violations of this commandment yearly in North America. Most are done by criminals who shoot people. A few dozen murders are committed by civil servants, who are employed by the state to kill inmates on death row with premeditation. Soldiers are often called upon to murder other humans, sometimes in self-defense, and other times in order to achieve a military objective. There are other biblical passages and a great deal of theological reasoning which have provided justification for the latter two actions.
Joshua and his army violated this commandment on numerous occasional as they marched through Canaan, apparently with God's approval. They were often ordered by God to commit genocide by killing every Pagan man, woman, youth, child, and newborn who lived in various cities of Canaan.
Some pacifist Christians take this commandment very seriously. They will not violate this commandment, even during times of war. Quakers, Mennonites and others are frequently able to volunteer for alternate service during wartime in order to conform to this commandment.
Historically, many Christian groups interpreted the Commandment as if it read "Thou shalt not murder people inside your group." The Christian Church has committed genocide many times in its history, exterminating such groups as the Cathars and Knights Templar. Starting in the late 15th century and continuing for 300 years, both Protestants and Roman Catholics rounded up heretics. "witches," and suspected Satan worshipers; the church executed many tens of thousands of them -- often by burning them alive. The Crusades against the Muslims are another indication of the misuse of this Commandment. Defenseless Jews and Muslims were massacred by the invading armies. In recent times, Serbian Orthodox Christians organized a major religiously-motivated genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina, largely against Muslims.
The Westminster Larger Catechism extends this commandment to include the "immoderate use of meat, drink, labor, and recreations; provoking words, oppression, quarreling," etc. It is not clear how they expanded the meaning of this verse to such an extreme.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10c9.htm
Pat Robertson is completely wrong on this.
Attacking Christianity because of one individual knucklehead's comments because he has confused his religion with his politics is also sterotypical nonsense
Some of you are committing the same fallacies as Pat Robertson in your logic.
Its really rather amusing - should I attack some liberial idealog in such a way - many of you would scream that that idealog does not represent all liberal thought - and you would be correct. But when it comes to Christianity - many of you lose your ability to reason.
Ah passion is nice - but sterotypical attacks well are just that.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
My favorite part was the reasoning:
Quote:
“You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it,” Robertson said. “It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.”
Translation: morally, the doctrine of assassination is indefensible in Christianity, but Chavez has a whole lot of oil, so I'll not just look the other way, I'll encourage it.
Jesus would be proud Pat, I'm sure.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
A self-proclaimed Christian calling for the assassination of someone. Is that a Christian thing to say? I'm just curious, not being a Christian. Wouldn't premeditated murder make baby Jesus cry?
We have the death penalty here andI believe most govenors who sign these are Christains. Being a christain doesnt make you better or more morale than anybody else. Theres all kinds of christains.
Quote:
I'm reasonably certain the Christian Bible doesn't allow for that kind of thing. Does it?
The old testament certainly does.
Quote:
He has stated on the air that activist judges are more of a threat to America than terrorists.
He may be correct.
Quote:
He said on his show that a small nuke at the State Department in Foggy Bottom would shake things up.
You dont think it would? ~D
Quote:
He has said that the Quran teaches violence, which is incorrect.
No its not.
Quote:
Assasination should be a last resort. If wars were that easy, the army would be out of a job.
So you may agree with him but not yet?
Quote:
in fact the USA tried to use missiles to assasinate Saddam at the start of the War on Iraq. and they called it a "decapitation strike" (how ironic is that ). this shows us that USA does indeed place high value on killing leaders ASAP.
In fact we assasinated his two children.
Look Robertson is a bit of a kook . It doesnt matter what his religion is he woud still feel the same. IF Chavez was really a threat to the US or if he were murdering people like Saddam in his own country I would support assasinating him. Right now he is just a pain in the butt.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Well, now that the local helmeted smacktards have come out to play; we can pretty much assume this thread is over.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Well, now that the local helmeted smacktards have come out to play; we can pretty much assume this thread is over.
Again look who is playing at being an child and claiming to be an adult.
So you want to attack others belief systems - but want yours to be left alone. LOL - very sterotypical behavior on your part.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
It's quite easy to take insults... that way, it's more fair to throw insults. :bow:
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
I think perhaps a more interesting question is, "Is there any room in Christian theology for assassination for political/economic reasons?"
I would contend there is not. One could perhaps try to get some mileage by taking quotes from the NT out of context or pointing to the OT, but to me, it is absolutely clear that Jesus would have abhorred such things. I'm not a Christian, but I know that Jesus was a man of peace, and I also know that Robertson's words violate the spirit of Jesus' teachings.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
He has stated that in a meeting with Bush prior to the invasion of Iraq, the president told him there would be no casualties. A claim the White House denies. For once, I believe the White House.
Is the White House denying that the meeting took place? Or did this lunatic actually get to meet the President? ~:eek:
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spetulhu
Is the White House denying that the meeting took place? Or did this lunatic actually get to meet the President? ~:eek:
That's scary.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
I think perhaps a more interesting question is, "Is there any room in Christian theology for assassination for political/economic reasons?"
I would contend there is not. One could perhaps try to get some mileage by taking quotes from the NT out of context or pointing to the OT, but to me, it is absolutely clear that Jesus would have abhorred such things. I'm not a Christian, but I know that Jesus was a man of peace, and I also know that Robertson's words violate the spirit of Jesus' teachings.
And, that in fact is the point.
I really don't see anyone slamming Christianity - so much as questioning how those identifying with Christian dogma can support a Jihadist like Roberts. A person, regardless of faith that uses "scripture" (or their own standing in a religious community) to insite the racism and prejudices of other like minded people is a terrorist, and should be treated as such.
Were Roberts words to have come out of the mouth of a Moslum jihadist, he would certainly be on a watch list. Maybe he is - doubt it though, people that meet with "W" are generally considered like minded and bullet proof to the rules of law.
:balloon2:
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
It is wrong for someone claiming to be a spiritual leader to be calling for assassination of legitimate heads of state. It's no better than if he was Mullah Robertson. Of course, Robertson's brand of religious fanatacism is what McCain spoke out against and took a drubbing for from the GOP voters.
Chavez is a bit nuts, and I don't like his politics (despite wanting to see reform), but unless he does some things that clearly put him out in former Qaddafi/Saddam territory, calling for his assassination is going a bit far.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by KafirChobee
And, that in fact is the point.
I really don't see anyone slamming Christianity - so much as questioning how those identifying with Christian dogma can support a Jihadist like Roberts. A person, regardless of faith that uses "scripture" (or their own standing in a religious community) to insite the racism and prejudices of other like minded people is a terrorist, and should be treated as such.
Roberts doesn't even follow Christian teachings - he preaches his own dogma. I sat down and watched his program for all of 5 minutes before I realized exactly what he was and what he was doing - and immediately turned the channel to MTV. And this was way back in the 1980's.
Quote:
Were Roberts words to have come out of the mouth of a Moslum jihadist, he would certainly be on a watch list. Maybe he is - doubt it though, people that meet with "W" are generally considered like minded and bullet proof to the rules of law.
:balloon2:
Yes Roberts deserves to be on the watch list - plus several other religious fanatics in this country.
LOL - now that last sentence is funny. How idealog of you.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
I think perhaps a more interesting question is, "Is there any room in Christian theology for assassination for political/economic reasons?"
Many a Pope had people assasinated for just such reasons. Is there any room in Christian theology for war?
Quote:
so much as questioning how those identifying with Christian dogma can support a Jihadist like Roberts
I saw nothing from him that says he wants Chavez killed for religous reasons. In this case his relgion has nothing to do with it.
Let me add this. I would prefer that national leaders be assasinated over war. The politicains start the wars let them be the ones who die for their ideals.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Let me add this. I would prefer that national leaders be assasinated over war. The politicains start the wars let them be the ones who die for their ideals.
Too bad GW didn't accept Saddam's offer of a duel between the two leaders to settle matters.
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Too bad GW didn't accept Saddam's offer of a duel between the two leaders to settle matters.
Im fine with that. Their probably both pretty good shots. ~:)
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
A wresting match would be good. ~D
-
Re: Pat Robertson proves once and for all that he's really the Anti-Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Many a Pope had people assasinated for just such reasons.
True, but are you saying they were right to do so?
Quote:
Is there any room in Christian theology for war?
I think there is space for a just war, at least in Catholic doctrine.
Augustine supported the wars of the Roman state to some extent, although he would have disagreed with the idea of promising Christians spiritual rewards for fighting (he would not have sanctioned crusades, I don't think).
The central point is that Jesus viewed war as something of this world, something Christians should generally avoid. He depicted it as an affliction they should suffer, not impose on others. The meek shall inherit the earth. The closest modern political analogue I believe would be Ghandi, with his philosophy of non-violent resistance. While wordsmiths might assert that assassination technically may not violate the letter of the few admonitions Jesus' left for us, assassination certainly violates their spirit.
