Pat Robertson Accused of Damaging Movement

AP on Yahoo | 2/18/06 | Sonja Barisic - ap

[NormsRevenge]

NORFOLK, Va. - Fellow conservative religious leaders have expressed concern and even open criticism over Pat Robertson's habit of shooting from the hip on his daily religious news-and-talk television program, "The 700 Club."

The Christian Coalition founder and former GOP presidential candidate has said American agents should assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution for pulling Israel out of the Gaza Strip.

Some observers say Robertson, who'll turn 76 next month, courts controversy as a strategy to stay recognizable and keep his followers mobilized. Others say he remains important to the evangelical movement that he helped create when he established the Virginia Beach-based Christian Broadcasting Network in 1960 — but he needs to stop damaging it with his words.

He canceled a speech planned for this coming Tuesday at the closing banquet of the National Religious Broadcasters convention in Dallas after NRB leaders said they were concerned that his appearance could detract from the event.

"He is in a very visible leadership position and comments such as recent ones related to Mr. Sharon and so many others are misinformed and presumptuous and border on arrogance," said David Dockery, president of Union University, a private college affiliated with the Tennessee Baptist Convention.

Dockery suggested Robertson might want to consult other theologians "before making these pronouncements so quickly."

"It puts the evangelical movement in a bad light when that happens because people make broad generalizations, rightly or wrongly, all the time," said Dockery, who also is chairman of the board for the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.

Robertson, through a spokesman, declined to be interviewed by The Associated Press.

He recently said on ABC's "Good Morning America" that he ad-libs his comments after watching news segments.

He later told the Christian magazine "World" that he's being more careful and reviewing news stories before going on the air because "I have seen an intensity of attack against me that is unparalleled in the 40-some years of the broadcast."

He apologized after facing swift condemnation for his Jan. 5 statement that Sharon was punished for "dividing God's land."

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's ethics and religious liberty commission, has said he was "stunned and appalled that Pat Robertson would claim to know the mind of God concerning whether particular tragic events ... were the judgments of God."

Robertson cited other demands on his time when he canceled his speech to the National Religious Broadcasters convention. NRB President Frank Wright told Associated Press Radio that Robertson was not asked to cancel, but he said NRB leaders did worry that the firestorm over his Sharon comments would detract media attention from the convention's focus. Robertson is on the group's board of directors.

Robertson started out as a Southern Baptist, but today he is a charismatic evangelical and believes that God is involved in guiding world events, said Barry Hankins, professor of history and church-state studies at Baylor University. He tries to interpret contemporary events as "being part of the drama of God's activity in the world."

"He puts the most fantastic spin on things to have a gripping quality about them to keep the ground troops alert," Hankins said.

On the other hand, Brian Britt, director of the Religious Studies Program at Virginia Tech, said Robertson's remarks aren't just "off-the-wall, crazy uncle stuff" but part of a strategy that earns him headlines.

When people attack Robertson, he wins sympathy for appearing to be an underdog, Britt said.

"It reinforces an image of Christianity as a persecuted religion, a religion that is being hounded by the secularists out of the public square, rather than a dominant and hegemonic force," Britt said.

___

Eds: Associated Press Radio reporter Steve Coleman contributed to this report from Washington, D.C.

___

On the Net:

Christian Broadcasting Network: http://www.cbn.com/

Pat Robertson: http://www.patrobertson.com/

[jecIIny]

"Frankly, he's right about Chavez."

Thats insane. It would either start (another) war, or at the very least it would alienate the United States from most of the rest of the world. And no we aren't big enough and bad enough to be able to blow off the entire world.

"And handing over the West Bank and Gaza completely seems to have been a bad move."

And what would you have done instead? If Israel did not withdraw then the Palestinian population would within 20 years have risen to the point where they outnumbered Jews inside Israel. They demand the vote and it's good bye to the Jewish state. Forced removal of the Palestinians was/is not an option for reasons too obvious to belabor.

[Martina]

I am not a Protestant but I like Pat Robertson. He has the right to say anything he wants to say. He makes alot of sense most of the time.

[isrul]

There is a segment of the population who thinks evangelicals are the most dangerous, insane group in the universe. There is a segment of the population who are or support evangelicals. And here is a segment of the population who is completely indifferent as o what evangelicals say and do. I don't think any groups' thinking will be changed by anything Robertson or anyone else says.

[justche]

Bet people said that about Moses too.
I have long NOT been a fan of Robertson - but I'm always amazed at the venom I see because the guy speaks his mind. Since when does freedom of speech exclude you because you're a Christian and don't cowtow to "polite" speech.

*Noah was older and building an ark - surely considered insane at the time. Lot trying to get his family out--I can just hear his kids - "come on give me a break, don't even look???" - John the author of Revelation - Now WHO in their ever lovin' right mind on FreeRepublic would take that guy's visions seriously?*

But Pat Robertson - let's lock him up and not let him talk in public anymore.

[politicket]

Biblical sin ? Last time I checked Pat Robertson wasn't God whatever you think. Pat Robertson is a self important fool with two screws loose who embarasses American Christianity by making arrogant, stupid statements.

Did you bother reading my post before jumping down my throat?

I never took sides one way or the other with Pat Robertson. I simply stated that the Bible lays out the method of approaching your brother who is in sin.

You are to approach your brother individually first. If he is not willing to listen then you need to approach those in authority over him to bring him to repentence. If that fails to work then you can make it known before the church body as a whole.

My question was simply asking whether Mr. Dockery followed biblical principles in approaching his brother, Pat Robertson?

[politicket]

The world needs to know there are reasonable evangelicals, so I applaud his statement.

At the expense of the Bible and what it teaches about approaching your brother who you believe to be in sin?

[F16Fighter]

Uh-boy -- Here's we go again:

Robertson is "senile," off-the-wall," an "embarrassment," a "nut."

Shall we dig into the archives of outrageously stupid comments and gestures made by the Pope, Rabbis, international "leaders," the President, various GOP/RAT Senators, Governors, and Congresscrap?

Robertson -- whose been on TV for a 25 years -- has uttered and written a million sensible words and sentences and thoughts in his life. Lately it's a simple exercise of jumping on the cheap-shot artist wagon for a couple hos couple of stumbles.

Everyone knows it's an obvious excuse to bash an icon of Protestantism/Christendom to the disproportionate extreme.

You people are disingenuously petty and BOR-ING.

[F16Fighter]

"There is a segment of the population who thinks evangelicals are the most dangerous, insane group in the universe."

And a bunch of these idiots howl at the moon from the attic of Free Republic.

[maranatha]

You are absolutely right, it would be sin if Mr. Dockery is a Christian. Maybe he isn't.

[delacoert]

Yeah. His only problem has been saying out loud what he is thinking.

[politicket]

You are absolutely right, it would be sin if Mr. Dockery is a Christian. Maybe he isn't.

I'm assuming that he is a professing Christian due to his position within the Tennessee Baptist Convention.

[ColdSteelTalon]

I only have tow words for Pat Robertson...

LIBERIAN GOLD.

[Sam the Sham]

When you run your mouth to the entire world as Robertson did presuming to speak for American Christianity, taking your response off line isn't an option. Robertson spoke publicly. He had to be shut down publicly. Things that happen in the public arena cannot be responded to privately.

[WayneS]

From the headline I thought he had broken a public toilet or something.

[Sam the Sham]

And it wasn't about being "in sin". In sin is if Dockery thought Robertson was having an affair. In sin is if Dockery thought Robertson was drinking too much. In sin is if Dockery thought Robertson was embezzling.

Making stupid public statements that presume to speak for all Christians isn't being "in sin".

[politicket]

When you run your mouth to the entire world as Robertson did presuming to speak for American Christianity, taking your response off line isn't an option. Robertson spoke publicly. He had to be shut down publicly. Things that happen in the public arena cannot be responded to privately.

You're simply Biblically incorrect. I know that you're probably frustrated, but that is no excuse to ignore Biblical principles.

[maranatha]

well said

[Sam the Sham]

Bull. Public actions cannot be responded to privately. You are foolishly confusing public with private actions.

If a Christian is sinning furtively you don't confront him publicly. You confront him privately. If you think someone is furtively sinning and will not change then you hold an 'intervention'.

What about public sin ? When Ananias and Sapphira publicly lied about the money they contributed did Peter privately take them aside and speak with them ? No. He denounced them immediately in front of the entire church. When Peter stopped eating with Gentiles, Paul rebuked him before the entire church.

We all live in a media fishbowl and Pat Robertson made fundamentalist Christians look like fools. That could not be let stand.

[WayneS]

The sin of Pride, perhaps?

[politicket]

Take your argument to God, not me....

Dealing with a Sinning Brother

15 “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’[b] 17 And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector. 18 “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. 19 “Again I say[c] to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”