Pat Robinson and Hati

It's an blowing-up-out-of-all-proportion exaggeration of a real event - the initial slave rebellion in Haiti in 1791 was sparked off by a voodoo ceremony, although the ideals behind the rebellion were firmly based in the principles of the French Revolution rather than voodoo. However, it does no harm to your cause to scare your enemies (the French) into thinking that you're in league with Old Nick, so the legend grew in the telling and, even today, is propagated by local guides to credulous tourists, in much the same way as our tourist guides in the UK like to tell visitors to big old houses thay they're haunted or that some gruesome murder occurred there in bygone years.

Here are a couple of articles by Haitian Christians which debunk the story: here and here

[ETA - here's the best response to Pat I've come across thus far, from someone called Lily Coyle writing in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

]
​

 

Haiti & Us

Our response in the aftermath of the Haiti quake is very commendable and the right thing to do. However, like with most reporting from our corporate media, we are never told, the reasons behind the reasons given.
We have been told, a billion times, since the quake hit, that Haiti is the poorest country, in the western hemisphere. But why? And we have also been told, that Haiti was very ill equipped, to deal with the quake, in every single respect.
To understand, what just happened in Haiti, we need to know, what happened before 'now' in Haiti. We need to know of the man-made quakes in Haiti's past, before the present natural quake: http://www.counterpunch.org/quigley01182010.html

www.americaninquirer.com

 

Good points, Nathan. Haiti's poverty compared with the neighbouring Dominican Republic, to which Pat (rightly) refers, has far more to do with human rather than Satanic forces. Beware though: there will be some here I expect who will accuse you of 'bashing' America; they forget Phil 3:17-21...

 

Matt, thanks for the references.

So far I've just glanced at them, and I'll print 'em later so's to make reading easier.

('Course you DO realize that this just really messes up a good tale, don't you??:smilewinkgrin: "May your armpits be infested with the fleas of a thousand camels" -Just Kidding:saint

 

Here's a more detailed account of the history of Haiti:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/o...eal Haiti, Look to History, Not Nature&st=cse

 

Maybe not a harsh rebuke...but he very clearly told them they were wrong.

 

Haiti and Pat Robertson

This was spoken by a Haitian citizen:

I do not know if God was behind the earthquake in Haiti (if He was, I don't know what His reasons were; I can only theorize).

I don't know if Satan was behind the Haitian earthquake, or if it was simply nature being permitted to take its course.

I'm not dogmatic about who or what caused the Haitian earthquake.

What annoys me is that so many other Christians are being pretty dogmatic about it, and that they are doing so in contra to Robertson's implied position, and his implied position is, in my view, entirely biblical.

I certainly do not agree with some of Robertson's views on some topics, but I do think he is being treated unfairly in this controversy.

The God of the Bible is a God of love and mercy, and He is willing to forgive the repentant, true enough. However, God still hates sin, and He still judges it.

I don't care for overly judgmental, unloving Pharisees or legalistic types myself, but I also find myself frustrated with Christians who are overly "lovey-dovey" and entirely too (easily) dismissive of God's wrath, fury, and anger.

And in the context of this latest Robertson fiasco, I'm seeing the overly lovey dovey ones come out of the wood work in droves, all over the web and on TV shows.

Have you ever heard of the genetic fallacy?

Or the expression that even a broken clock is right twice a day?

"Magical?"

You make it sound as though petitioning God is of the occult.

Far from being occultic, prayer is sanctioned in Scriptures, and we are encouraged to approach God with any and all our needs and requests.

That is true.

However, part of the problem is a lot of people, even Christians, took Robertson's words regarding the Haitian earthquake out of context, misquoted him, and / or read things into them that were not there, and they keep doing this, even now.

All one has to do is look up the transcript online to see what the man actually said and not what the atheistic, secular, liberal humanists think he said.

I expect the Non-Christians to jump all over Robertson for something like this, but to see so many Christians do so is unsettling and a disappointment.

How do you know God did not?

Why are so many Christians so uncomfortable with the fact that God has, and will again (see the book of Revelation), use natural disasters to judge unrepentant sinners, and that this might have been the case with the Haitian earthquake?

(By the way, if you look at the book of Revelation, it is recorded that in the end times, God will have angels wreck havoc on the natural order, and God will not send prophets beforehand to warn the people in each and every case.

God did not even technically have to do so with the Hebrews, since He already told them from the start if they broke the covenant, He would send judgment on them. The Israelites already knew there would be penalties if they sinned.)

The nation of Haiti is heavily steeped in voo-doo and has been for many years.

I just saw a news segment last night on Fox cable news where a reporter mentioned that Haitians have turned to voo-doo to calm their nerves.

The Fox network then showed recently filmed video of a local Haitian man engaging in a voo doo ritual: spitting rum (or some kind of liquid) in the air to calm the angry spirits.

I do not think it heartless, unorthodox, or unbiblical to wonder if, or to suggest, that the earthquake may have been divine retribution over the Haitians' pagan (ultimately what we know to be demonic) religion, or over their high crime rate (many Haitians are involved in drug running, and they mug and kill one another).

If not retribution or punishment per se, maybe the earthquake was a "wake up call" by God to the Haitian people.

At the very least, voo doo is a form of idolatry, and God will not bless or protect anyone who engages in whole scale, chronic paganism.

You'll notice God did not tolerate idolatry from His chosen people. He allowed the lapsed Israelites to be carried off in captivity, endure famine, or suffer defeat in war.

What makes anyone think God would let Haiti, or any other nation, off the hook for the same sins?

Is it because this is the year 2010 and divine punishment seems "old fashioned" to us?

God says in the Bible that His character does not change. If God didn't approve of idolatry 5,000 years ago, He's not going to be any more tolerant of it now.

The Bible says that physical death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person: spiritual death is more serious.

Jesus told people if their hand caused them to sin, to cut if off, for it would be better to enter the kingdom handless than to burn in hell with two hands.

Jesus also said not to fear one who could kill the body, but rather to fear the one who could kill both body and soul.

Christian missionaries have been in Haiti for years now, so I would think by now more than a few Haitians have heard the Gospel.

Just because there was a handful of godly, Christian people (including American ones) when the earthquake struck does not negate the possibility that it could've been divine judgment.

The rain falls on the just and the unjust, etc.

The Bible makes it clear that good people are not always going to be immune from tribulation, even the same tribulation that falls on the bad.

Robertson himself is a conservative, especially on social issues: he frequently speaks out against abortion and the legalization of homosexual marriage in the United States, for example.

Robertson does not agree with liberals, whether of the political stripe, or the religious variety (e.g., Christian liberals who run around telling us that the Bible is filled with error).

Regarding this comment:

"[Robertson] thinks he can heal people"

What is out of bounds with that?

Believers were given authority to heal in the name of Jesus. After Jesus ascended, the apostles went about healing the lame and the blind in His name.

Is your ridicule merely because the guy offers prayers over the TV set for healing?

God is not limited or bound by physical dimension just because we are.

You don't have to be seated right next to someone to ask God to heal that person.

The Roman soldier got Jesus to heal his servant, and told Jesus he did not need Jesus physically present at his house to do the healing.

The Roman believed if Jesus just gave the word on the spot that his servant, who was back home, probably miles away, would be healed - and he was.

EDITED to add:

What a strange comment. We can know, to an extent what "God thinks" about some topics, since God plainly spells out for us in the Scriptures what He thinks!

God even tells us what He wants us to think about some issues.

Even when the Bible is not "black and white" or clear-cut on a topic, we can still derive at an educated guess of what God thinks, based upon other Bible precepts.

For example:
The Bible does not specifically mention "Playboy" magazine, but based upon Jesus' admonishment that to look upon a person in lust is considered to be just as bad as adultery, I think we can safely arrive at the conclusion that God does not condone "Playboy" magazine.

 

All-in-all, a very good, accurate and thoughtful post.

The cited quote jumped out at me though, cause I believe that this philosophy (modernism, liberalism & relegating His word to an "analogy") is one of the biggest reasons we don't see the miracles today that we read of missionaries experiencing first hand.

 

Good post! Careful thought and on topic! (I think you already know that).
Welcom to BB, first time poster. Hope we see more of your postings!

 

So Robertson is being taken out of context, but even if he did imply it, it is biblical. You're not dogmatic like Robertson's opponents, but you defend the position.

Again, it's not a matter of "old fashioned"; but the judgments in the Bible are what are being taken out of context. There was still a lot of "special revelation" in biblical times, so the people were judged more harshly. There is no longer any special revelation. Jesus said "to whom much is given, much is expected". Then, the mention of angels in Revelation. There may not have been much warning, but there was still special revelation that had been resumed. So that time is very much like biblical times.

Everybody has sinned, and ever nation (consisting 100% of these sinners) deserves judgment. So why would God single out Haiti?
(Now watch what happens here):
Because of voodoo? Do you see what you're (or Robertson) is doing? You're declaring someone else's sins "over the top", and warranting judgment that you are spared! Basically, the same attitude as "God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men [are], extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican." (Luke 18:11)

This is why Christians oppose Robertson. It's not because they all sold out to "lovey-dovey" and all the other "old-liner" jargon (though with some it is like that). It naturally smacks of self-righteousness, even though most of the critics might not articulate this much.

So yes, it hypothetically could be some kind of judgment, but we do not have any biblical warrant to say they deserved judgment, while others apparently do not. If you try to say "We just do not know God's reason", then it's best to not speculate this in the first place. So from the evidence we have now, there is no reason to say it is anything more than an a natural tragedy. We cannot speculate on "this is part of the endtimes judgment", as Christians have thought it was the end-times (and everything that happened having prophetic significance) for the church's entire history. Unless you want to join Camping and say the end is next year.

 

:applause:

 

Certainly in the case of Sodom and Gomarrah, for instance, God judged their behavior to be 'over the top'. Do you ask God why he had the nerve, the nerve! to judge them in that way when all peoples were sinful? Genesis 18:20 says, "their sin is exceedingly grave.'"


Again, if I were Pat Robertson I wouldn't have made that comment at the time that he did, but are you sure that it's wrong to speculate on God's judgements here on earth? Unless you think He's not in that line of work anymore.

 

This is the same guy who blamed 9/11 on homosexual activity in the US. Its hard to take him seriously after that. There are Christians in Haiti anyhow.

 

Peter (2 peter 2:6) said that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was meant to be an example, something that was to be paid attention. Pat Robertson isn't the first who has called on us to humble ourselves in the face of a disaster, preachers have done this for centuries.

 

I agree, Roger.

 

I'll say this: we know that God is absolutely Sovereign over His creation. So He did indeed do this. WHY He did it, is another matter. It COULD very well be that He is raining down judgment. But it could also be a way to speed up evangelism efforts over there, and bring attention to the country's physical needs.

 

I also wanted to add: I still think Pat is a nut case: but he may have a point, in this case. You should be able to vote for more than one.

 

He doesn't have a point. And yes he is a nut case.

 

Maybe so, on Sodam & Gomorrah. But do you really think 9/11 occurred because of homosexuality in America? There are other countries with more homosexuals, and more liberal sexuality laws, that have not suffered a major terrorist attack in recent years.