Pat Robertson has spoken:
When did Robertson become a valley girl?
The fun continues:
This is one of the sickest things I have read from this man in a long time.
So, Bush is excused from all of his “terrible mistakes” because he’s a “man of prayer”? That is disgusting.
I am in awe that he would say this out loud. All I can say is WHAT THE FUCK!?
I like Rev. Barry W. Lynn’s response:
Even though this made me laugh, I fear Robertson may be right (about Bush winning, not about it being a blowout).
he “could” make terrible mistakes??? god help us all. the ones he’s done so far, aren’t “terrible mistakes”???
God is blessing him?
Well,why the heck isn’t God blessing US?!
He’s just getting warmed up. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!
Hell, last time out he actually lost the popular vote, and he still rules as though he won by a hefty majority. If he should win the next election 50.01% to 49.99%, he will take that to be an absolute and unqualified mandate from the Real Americans.
And then, verily, the trajectory of the shit will intersect the locus of the fan.
Whether you support Bush or not, everyone should be offended at the idea that Robertson’s God wouldn’t care what any individual human does, “good or bad,” and bless him/her nonetheless.
This isn’t part of mainstream Christian doctrine these days, is it? Or did I miss a memo?
This is exactly what I found so disturbing. So Bush, or anyone, can do whatever they want and then expect to be forgiven because they are “men (or women) of prayer”?
Maybe now it’s time for me to get that Ferrari I always wanted. Anyone have a screwdriver I can borrow?
This is both the funniest and most insightful thing I’ve read here in some time.
hey, thanks!
Hee! I’m having visions of Rove doing the “speaker implanted in fake tooth” bit from Real Genius.
“George Bush will win the election. And Pat? Stop touching yourself.”
“It really is God!”
Aren’t Osama, fascist Hindu nationalists, the Taliban and the Iranian mullahs also ‘men of prayer’? Is Pat not worried about a prayerful stalemate between all these men of prayer or is it because his is a ‘real god’ and theirs are just idols?
I think you may have missed a memo.
Depending on what branch of mainstream Christianity you’re talking about, one of the more or less logical consequences of God’s grace being completely and entirely independent of your actions is that once you’ve received God’s grace, nothing you can do can change that fact. So if you’ve been saved, you could take a gun to the mall at Christmastime and mow everybody down, torture puppies and kittens, and keep a wardrobe made entirely from baby skin, you’d still be saved. Yeah, I know, why would someone who was granted God’s grace do such things? Good question, but there you go.
Now, not all mainstream Christians consider grace as being so entirely independent of one’s actions, and I’d say that most of those who do wouldn’t think that meant that being saved is a pass to doing whatever the heck you want with no eternal consequences. But PR’s declaration here–that someone who is saved can make terrible mistakes and still be “blessed”–is technically in tune with the beliefs of a fair number of mainstream Christians.
As Bren_Cameron points out, this idea is an important part of American (and European) religious and intellectual history. The Puritans of Massachusetts spent much of their time trying to find the right balance between “faith” and “works” as criteria for salvation. They rejected strict Calvinist predestinarianism, which said that God had already decided who was saved and who was not, so nothing you did made any difference. This, they believed, was the antinomian heresy that, if followed, would exempt the saved from the obligation to follow the moral or Mosaic (after Moses, and the Ten Commandments) law.
The Puritans also, however, rejected arminianism (named after a chap called Arminius), which was the notion that human will and action alone were the key to salvation. Arminianism was, in large measure, a reaction to Calvinist notions of predestination, and sought to inject human reason and free will into man’s relationship with God.
The Puritans had quite a time trying to reconcile the two aspects of their Protestant faith, and came up with a rather convoluted, but also ingenious compromise called the Covenant of Grace. A fascinating account of all this can be found in the classic study, Perry Miller, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century.
Others with more knowledge of current practices might want to correct me, but i don’t believe that too many modern denominations in America adopt a strict Calvinist notion of predestination that makes human will and action irrelevant. One of the few groups that i’ve come across that does indeed hold to such a strict predestinarian ethos is Fred Phelps’s Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.
According to their website, the WBC believes in the
They also reprint the full text from a sixteenth century tract called “The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination,” which gives you some idea of the theological and intellectual underpinnings of the movement.
Note: I don’t mean to suggest that all predestinarian Christians are as fucked up and scary as Phelps.
Careful guys I think it’s bullshit. In the first thread about this I asked what would win the next at Warwick Farm…even though I gave him two options (including the winner) there was no response.
I don’t think it’s the Lord. I think it’s static.
So what? Everyone knew the rules. If Gore had lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote, would you be pissing and moaning 3 years later? Would you still be saying that he needs to concede defeat?
“Still rules as though he won by a hefty majority”??? WTF does that mean? Should he rule with poor self-esteem?
Look dude, I think the whole Gulf War II thing has been a tremendous waste of lives and money, but this “My guy is our saviour, your guy is the Antichrist” bit gets old. It doesn’t matter which side is doing the bitching.
Yeah I voted for GWB but at least my head isn’t so far up my own ass that I can’t criticize him.
You’re right. That’s the least.
The part that most burns lefties is that there were enormous ‘irregularities’ in the conduct of the poll, all in favour of the Republicans as far as I’ve heard, and George still won. If Gore had won, of course the conservatives would piss and moan (and pray) but they’d have even less grounds to do so. You’re right though; it’s all moot apart from the fact that there are lessons to be learned.
If Gore had won, the conservatives wouldn’t have bothered with pissing and moaning – they’d have moved straight on into Scandalous Rumor-Spreading, “Independent” Investigations, and more of the same Presidential shit-slinging they mastered after eight years of Clinton.
The Golden Calf sees Ralph Nader in a landslide.
If this means Robertson’s flock doesn’t have to show up on Election Day, then where’s the harm?
From your lips to the ears of Allah…