Posted on 01/15/2010 2:33:54 PM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
Earlier, I posted a thread from Al Mohler's blog titled "Does God Hate Haiti?" I made the mistake of posting the whole blog rather than the excerpt highlighting Mohler's main points. Many freepers made assumptions about Mohler's Biblical insight based on the title and first few paragraphs without reading the ENTIRE article.
Mohler is simply reminding believers GOD is in control of all things, whether we fully understand His reasons or not. "We have no right to claim that God was surprised by the earthquake in Haiti, or to allow that God could not have prevented it from happening."
Mohler then stated, "The arrogance of human presumption is a real and present danger. We can trace the effects of a drunk driver to a car accident, but we cannot trace the effects of voodoo to an earthquake -- at least not so directly." He reminds us of the futility of this sort of speculation by posing the following questions, "Why did no earthquake shake Nazi Germany? Why did no tsunami swallow up the killing fields of Cambodia? Why did Hurricane Katrina destroy far more evangelical churches than casinos? Why do so many murderous dictators live to old age while many missionaries die young?"
Mohler was NOT agreeing with Robertson or claiming that "God hates Haitians." Quite the contrary, "In other words, the earthquake reminds us that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only real message of hope. The cross of Christ declares that Jesus loves Haiti -- and the Haitian people are the objects of his love. Christ would have us show the Haitian nation his love, and share his Gospel. In the midst of this unspeakable tragedy, Christ would have us rush to aid the suffering people of Haiti, and rush to tell the Haitian people of his love, his cross, and salvation in his name alone."
In the past, Mohler has openly rebuked comments made by Pat Robertson.
I've posted that example underneath.
All human beings are capable of making outrageous comments, fraudulent claims, and scandalous conversation. That is part of the human condition -- part of being a sinner. Language is a powerful gift, but the evil use of language can do great and grave damage.
This is painfully clear in the aftermath of Christian Broadcasting Network founder Pat Robertson's comments about the potential assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Here are Robertson's comments from Monday's edition of CBN's "The 700 Club:"
"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said of Chavez in Monday's broadcast of "The 700 Club." "We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."
With unmistakable clarity and an apparent lack of self-consciousness, Robertson simply called for an assassination, presumably to be undertaken by U.S. military forces in violation of U.S. law.
In so doing he gave the Venezuelan leader a propaganda gold mine, embarrassed the Bush administration, and left millions of viewers perplexed and troubled. More importantly, he brought shame to the cause of Christ. This is the kind of outrageous statement that makes evangelism all the more difficult. Missing from the entire context is the Christian understanding that violence can never be blessed as a good, but may only be employed under circumstances that would justify the limited use of lethal force in order to prevent even greater violence. Our witness to the Gospel is inevitably and deeply harmed when a recognized Christian leader casually recommends the assassination of a world leader.
Hugo Chavez is a dangerous and reckless factor on the world scene. His extreme nationalism, combined with Marxism, has led his country directly into conflict with the U.S. and much of the civilized world. He has befriended Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and given support to forces of global anarchy. Credible sources link him to support -- direct or indirect -- of groups involved in terrorism.
Nevertheless, Pat Robertson's comments lacked any indication that he even understood the gravity of his proposal. He has brought embarrassment upon us all.
I am thankful for every person who has been reached for the Gospel through Pat Robertson's vast ministry. I am thankful for his brave support of unpopular Christian causes. I respect what he has done through Regent University. He has been courageous in defense of many moral causes when others were silent.
Now, with so much at stake, Pat Robertson bears responsibility to retract, rethink, repent, and restate his position on this issue. Otherwise, what could have been a temporary lapse of judgment can become an enduring obstacle to the Gospel. Mr. Robertson, it's back in your court. Your Christian brothers and sisters must love you enough to tell you the truth -- and encourage you to set the record straight.
but at least Danny Glover was making sense.
//sarcasm
Maybe God is controlling the Mass. election.
No less an authority than Jesus addressed this explicitly when his disciples asked about a number of worshipers when a tower fell on them during prayer. I don’t recall the exact wording or chapter and verse, but will try to find it.
On another occasion, after Jesus had restored the sight of a blind man, the disciples asked who had sinned and caused the man to be blind. He was very explicit in telling them that no one had sinned. The man was born blind so that he could be used to show the power of God.
And yet another time He was asked about a group of worshipers who had been attacked and murdered during their prayers. Again, He said such things don’t happen as God’s way of punishing sin.
Perhaps someone here ‘bouts knows the verses for these, meantime I’ll be looking!
Luke 13:1-5:
Now there were some present on that occasion who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. He answered them, “Do you think these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered these things? No, I tell you! But unless you repent, you will all perish as well! Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower in Siloam fell on them, do you think they were worse offenders than all the others who live in Jerusalem? No, I tell you! But unless you repent you will all perish as well!”
John 9:1-5:
“Now as Jesus was passing by, he saw a man who had been blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man or his parents?” Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but he was born blind so that the acts of God may be revealed through what happens to him. We must perform the deeds of the one who sent me as long as it is daytime. Night is coming when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”
A million thanks! I remember these examples being used by my pastor when I was in HS, in 1955. I have always taken them to mean that God does not punish us here and now for our sins of here and now. He has set a date for us to stand before Him and answer for our lives, and we will be held accountable at that time for how we have used what He gave us.
That’s NOT to say that we don’t suffer, sometimes unto death, for our sins, but that’s different from the outcome of our day of judgment. And, I put the verse of the sins of the father being visited on the son in the same category. That is, a father could have an STD as the result of a sinful relationship, and his offspring could be born with severe problems as a result. But that’s not God visiting the sins of the father on the son, that’s simply nature and the way things are.
Thanks again!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.