Replies

What exactly is the basis for the strong objection to Pat Robertson’s statement, Biblically grounded and grounded in historical fact as it so obviously is?

It appears to me, that nominal Christians, and non-Christians purporting to be Christian, who do not understand the Bible at all, are reacting out of fear that it sounds too “judgmental.” Never mind that God clearly does raise up leaders of the nations, even nations themselves, and just as surely casts them down. They also do not understand that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike, as it surely did there and will here as well, soon enough.

And, never mind that the “patriotic” founding lore of Haiti cites this voodoo ceremony, this pact, wherein a spirit was conjured and a blood sacrifice offered, to aid them in killing their French overlords. This is “patriotic” to them, just as much as our Founding Fathers, Godly men all, are to us.

There’s an element of defensiveness among those who think the whole, ugly occult truth makes a certain church look bad, too, for having tolerated it for centuries, as well. I do know the vodouisants hate the “shouter” churches, and regard them as invaders. That tells me something, that the 10% or 20%, or whatever percentage one cares to cite, of Haitians who are not practitioners of vodou, are “shouters.” Charismatics. Evangelicals. Converts, in other words. So, there is at least some hope among the ruins. There is also hope that the error of allowing occult within the walls of the majority church has been made clear, and that that will be rejected and cast out.

Pat Robertson has his peculiarities, his strengths and his weaknesses, as do we all, and I do not agree with him even close to all the time. I’m really not that wild about him, frankly. But, he spoke truth and was attacked for it, just as he spoke truth about Chavez in Venezuela and was attacked for it.

I’ll speak out for Pat Robertson when he speaks truth. He is being very unfairly denigrated in this instance, which is just the latest of many. He seems to have a certain gift of clarity, when dealing with that particular region of the world, imho. He also has a way of speaking polemically, that fosters great debate and hopefully better understanding.

That’s not to say he has the same gift elsewhere. His political instincts on the domestic front appear rather skewed.

That’s just my little old two cents on the matter, offered free of charge. Take it for what it’s worth, lol.