Pat Robertson said, "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him [democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez] , I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop."
Suppose there is an internationally known mullah in the United States, who has a TV show watched every week by millions of faithful Muslims. He is as fundamentalist in his faith as Pat Robertson is in his and equally extreme in his politics. One day this mullah puts out a call on his TV show for Prime Minister Tony Blair to be assassinated. I have little doubt that this person would be branded a terrorist or someone inciting terrorism and arrested. By the definitions laid out by the United States, Robertson is calling for an act of international terrorism.
Given the preacher's ties to Bush's christian supporters, should legal action be taken against Pat Robertson? The Venezuelan government said, "This public call to assassinate a head of state, considered a crime by all modern legislation, is prosecutable by its very nature. That is what the civilized would is expecting of the U.S. authorities." Are the Venezuelans right?
Pat Robertson
Moderator: Moderators
Post #101
nope...I was in error...it's to do with fellowship, but it does seem to
conflict with Matt 9:12-13
9:12But when he heard it, he said, They that are whole have no need of a
physician, but they that are sick. 9:13But go ye and learn what this meaneth,
I desire mercy, and not sacrifice, for I came not to call the righteous, but
sinners.
conflict with Matt 9:12-13
9:12But when he heard it, he said, They that are whole have no need of a
physician, but they that are sick. 9:13But go ye and learn what this meaneth,
I desire mercy, and not sacrifice, for I came not to call the righteous, but
sinners.
Post #104
I noted All Things Considered had a story on Pat today. It included several of Robertson's gaffes in his own words, as well as some comments by fellow evangelical's.
A leading Southern Baptist noted that Robertson's statements regarding divine retribution were unsupported and even counter to sound Biblical doctrine. God's says, including his retribution, is 'unfathomable' and as such, mere mortals are in no position to pronounce when this is happening and when it is not. In other words, even if you buy into the idea that God intervenes in history for retribution and other reasons, people who claim to be knowing when this is happening and when it is not are full of baloney.
A leading Southern Baptist noted that Robertson's statements regarding divine retribution were unsupported and even counter to sound Biblical doctrine. God's says, including his retribution, is 'unfathomable' and as such, mere mortals are in no position to pronounce when this is happening and when it is not. In other words, even if you buy into the idea that God intervenes in history for retribution and other reasons, people who claim to be knowing when this is happening and when it is not are full of baloney.
Post #105
But it is in keeping with Biblical principles. Read the books of the prophets. But, I believe God has left America to its own devices. No pun intended.even if you buy into the idea that God intervenes in history for retribution and other reasons, people who claim to be knowing when this is happening and when it is not are full of baloney.
-
Cathar1950
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
- Location: Michigan(616)
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #106
You might have something there 1John2_26 if you follow my editing.full of baloney...
But it is in keeping with Biblical principles.
Pat is no prophet.
