« Home | Now I'll Never Know If Jesus Is Real » | The Reason For Not Posting Lately » | A Great Post Over At What You Do, Do Quickly » | My Last Osteen Post, For A While » | Yes! I Knew It, I'm Not A Heretic! » | Joel Osteen Came To Town » | Is Ablaze! Working?, It Might Be » | Joel Osteen Comes To Town » | Curses, I've Been Tagged » | The Confession of Saint Peter » 

Monday, February 13, 2006 

Is Pat Robertson Right?, No!

In a previous post I expressed unbelief that anyone takes Pat Robertson seriously. After that, I started a discussion offline with TL after an email which stated " Frank, I think that Pat Robinson was saying it like it is, God said that land was for Israel, it was promised to them. He just can't say the truth because most people don't understand it and he seems way off the wall. He is really right on the money. TL".

Let's take a quick look at what Robertson said. Pat Robertson suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution for the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which Robertson opposed. I guess that God is still punishing Sharon. Last weekend Sharon needed emergency surgery to remove part of his intestines. Using TL's logic, God must be very, very ticked off to continue to punish a comatose man.

So I asked TL if it would be ok to post the email and start a discussion about the fact that I don't believe the God punished Sharon for giving the Palestinians some land. TL said it would be ok to post the short email as long the name was removed. I've also been discussing the fact that I believe that Christ is the fulfillment and reason for the Old testament Judaism rather than to set up a political state of Israel. I would like some help in the discussion of Robertson's ideas that if we don't do this or that we should expect divine wrath in the form of strokes, hurricanes, or any thing else for that matter.

The flip side of this coin is the Osteenian idea that if we do that which is pleasing or if we believe enough, God will bless us with worldly riches that can be seen by all. What about the parents of children with disabilities? What did these parents do so wrong to deserve that. Why didn't God punish the parents with strokes instead of punishing the children. My best friend's first child has a form of severe autism. What did my friends do that was so bad for this kind of punishment? This is the where Robertson's line of thinking will naturally take us.

Over the next few days I will be very busy and would appreciate some help starting the discussion.

Okay, I'll go first:

Repeatedly in the Scriptures God is represented as the God who forgives sins.

5 And the Lord descended in the cloud and stood there with him as he called upon the name of the Lord. 6 Then the Lord passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; 7 who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations” (Exodus 34:5-7).

17 “And they refused to listen, And did not remember Thy wondrous deeds which Thou hadst performed among them; So they became stubborn and appointed a leader to return to their slavery in Egypt. But Thou art a God of forgiveness, Gracious and compassionate, Slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness; And Thou didst not forsake them” (Nehemiah 9:17).

5 For Thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive, And abundant in lovingkindness to all who call upon Thee (Psalm 86:5).

4 But there is forgiveness with Thee, That Thou mayest be feared (Psalm 130:4).

9 “To the Lord our God belong compassion and forgiveness, for we have rebelled against Him” (Daniel 9:9).

These passages describe the God I have lived with all my life. He doesn't punish, he forgives. Robertson's premise is ridiculous at best, blasphemous at worst.


If the land is theirs, does this mean the Law of the Old Testament still applies?

Better yet, why don't we just start performing sacrifices at the temple again? Well, it's because the Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
I also tried to bring up the fact that God used the Babylonians to remove Israel from the land because of their wickedness. That didn't go over well.

Nice icon! Where can I find the shirt it came from?


The design is mine. There is an earlier post that links to the site where I get the shirts. After that it's just a matter of putting a logo on it. Go ahead and send me an email and I'll mail ya more

There's currently nothing available except the two golf shirts?

any kind of shirt you want is availiable. Go back to January's post, the link for my shirt vendor is there

That's what I did. Every category except for golf shirts has this message when I click on it. "There are no products to list in this category."

Oh, is the offline catalog where I'm supposed to be?

Yes, everything at that link is availiable. Just tell me what you want in an email. I have left over from a trip to CTS a blue hooded sweatshirt and a light blue polo left over.
Do me a favor and send me an email so we can chat off the site.

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Paul, Is it safe to assume you believe that a third earthly temple is going to be built? Is it also safe to say that you believe that Christ will return and set up a earthly kingdom for a literal thousand years?

Nice try Paul. That little link you posted not only goes against blogging etiquete, but shows you are of the same ilk as Robertson.

Dear Frank,

I still have an open mind about the literal building of the third temple, what are your thoughts on that? I didn't believe in a literal kingdom of Christ on earth until recently. I believe he will come to the earth briefly in the flesh, then ascend and rule over a new multi-racial nation from heaven. Jews, Muslims, Christians, and others will all be redirected toward a better path of peace. What do you think? I'll pass over your comment on etiquete, as the range of sensibilities on this topic is wide and I wish no offense.
--Paul Kingery

Paul, you write the following:

Ariel Sharon’s deadly head wound
The beast was to receive a deadly wound to his head, from which he will recover(Revelation 13:3):“And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.” Ariel had a minor stroke in December 2005 on his way from Jerusalem to his rural estate. On January 4, 2006, he experienced a massive stroke. He was put into a coma by his physicians to
allow the blood to dissipate and his brain to heal, his head was operated on three times,and power was temporarily transferred to his deputy. Leaders expect that he will not return to power. As I write, he is still in a coma but breathing on his own. The scriptures prophesy that he will recover and continue to rule for another three and a half years (Revelation 13:5): “And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and
power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.” He could rule in the flesh or an image to him could be raised up to continue his power structure. He may rule directly, or his policies would be continued as he is venerated by his son Gilead and their political alliance of 10 principal men.

No, I'm not the kind to call this leader or that the "beast". It sounds like, to me at least, you consider yourself a premillennial dispensationalist. I'm also a little confused as to what you mean when you write "and others will all be redirected toward a better path of peace." Are you saying there is somewhere all warm and fuzzy for them to go?
I am saying, we have been living in the end times since Christ Himself said "it is finished" on the cross. I am certainly not waiting for current events to start matching up with memorized Bible passages.

Post a Comment

About me

  • I'm Frank Gillespie
  • From The Haut South
  • Confessional Lutheran
My profile


Powered by Blogger