Pat Robertson Blasts SNL Tebow Skit: ‘There’s an Anti-Christian Bigotry‘ That’s ‘Disgustin

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
Here's all I have to say about this subject...

Refresher on the Religion of Peace
South Park Censored

I believe these photos have been exposed as a false flag by agent saboteurs. Notice that the hand writing is the same on every single sign and they're all pasted paper on cardboard. It's either a fraud or they all used the same sign maker! Makes for good headlines though.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by defuntion

 

That is pretty light. Pat called for bodies on the street over that skit!

I still say my first title was correct.

You have bodies on the street all over Iraq and Afghanistan.

I take it Americans are practicing Sharia law there then?



Seriously. Stop being so MSM.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by izero

 

What pseudo-Christian . . .

--slapped you?
--called you names?
--made funny faces at you?
--excluded you from their group?
--castrated or attempted to castrate you?
--stole your girl?
--raped your sister?
--killed your parents?
--stole your job?
--insulted you?
-- . . .

i.e. where's all this intense angst toward a BELIEF SYSTEM coming from?

WHO instilled it, triggered it way back when and how?

Umm I don't hate Christians or Muslims - however I have no respect for their beliefs and reserve my right to be obnoxious about my beliefs or lack of

And i think you'll find scholars (religious and atheist alike) are divided in their opinion as religious documents being historically accurate. Maybe accurate in terms of general views and attitudes but not as docs to base history on.

reply to post by izero


No.

What I've found is that Faith based scholars are enormously more objective, fair-minded and accurate about the evidence.

Atheist/agnostic 'scholars' seem to have a very emotional, visceral, hostile axe to grind and are determined to squeeze the data until it complies with their agenda.

reply to post by Wotaneyed


Oh really?

Show me.

Many such demonstartions have a person better at sign making or a few such people making virtually all the signs.

Are you skeptical that such sentiments are held by such folks?

How much of their original source documents have you read?

reply to post by TitaniumL


The vast majority of those bodies had their lives destroyed by their follow Muslims in the name of Islam.

Religious radicals have caused more death in the name of religion than any other cause in the history of mankind.

reply to post by poet1b

Religious radicals have caused more death in the name of religion than any other cause in the history of mankind.

THAT'S SIMPLY UNTRUE.

Particularly when you stack up the 130 or so million deaths of their own people by Marxism/Communism.

Atheism is enormously ahead of the pack on such tallys.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Well, the commies are trying to make up for lost time, but I doubt they can compete with the numbers worked to death by the Catholic Conquistadors, and of course all the sacrifices by the Aztecs, centuries of Muslim conquests, and Buddhist, Shintoists in WW II.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
think sometimes he enjoys saying startling things like that--perhaps to create a controversy and thereby get more people to discuss the topic he feels strongly about and the options he throws out there and why.

So you're saying he enjoys creating controversy by (for example) obliquely referencing violent action?

Which more or less gets us back on topic.

And by the way, Pat has a long and documented history of failed prophecy for which the Biblical sentence is death according to Deut.18:20-22.

Of course, I'm not advocating killing him by any means. Just pointing out the perils of cherry picking the Old Testament.

reply to post by poet1b


IIRC, all those total did not come remotely close to the Marxist/Communist death totals.

There has been some reasonably good research on the topic and the Marxists are just wayyyy out ahead.

Of course, the Marxist/globalists are planning to race wayyyy ahead with BILLIONS of mass genocidal deaths. Stay tuned on that score.

Scripture indicates that 1/3 of the current population will die and then later 1/3 of what's left will die. Thankfully, that's still not up to the plans of the Marxist globalists.

Thankfully, The Almighty God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Pat Robertson has a different plan than the Marxist globalists.

reply to post by poet1b


Here is one article alone which demonstrates rather conclusively the

VERY FALSE

assumptions you have made about religion bing a bigger cause of mass deaths than other causes.

en.wikipedia.org...

--tribal/ethnic factors
--conquest/war for turf, control, power factors
--disease factors
--political factors

were all historically beyond even the totals over history of the religious factors.

reply to post by poet1b


This appears to be a better doc on the Marxist deaths after 7 years of study:

www.hawaii.edu...

Of course, eventhough systematically determined and calculated, all these figures and their graph are only rough approximations. Even were we to have total access to all communist archives we still would not be able to calculate precisely how many the communists murdered. Consider that even in spite of the archival statistics and detailed reports of survivors, the best experts still disagree by over 40 percent on the total number of Jews killed by the Nazis. We cannot expect near this accuracy for the victims of communism. We can, however, get a probable order of magnitude and a relative approximation of these deaths within a most likely range. And that is what the figures in Table 1 are meant to be. Their apparent precision is only due to the total for most communist governments being the summation of dozens of subtotals (as of forced labor deaths each year) and calculations (as in extrapolating scholarly estimates of executions or massacres).

With this understood, the Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these. Most of the deaths, perhaps around 39,000,000 are due to lethal forced labor in gulag and transit thereto. Communist China up to 1987, but mainly from 1949 through the cultural revolution, which alone may have seen over 1,000,000 murdered, is the second worst megamurderer. Then there are the lesser megamurderers, such as North Korea and Tito's Yugoslavia.

Obviously the population that is available to kill will make a big difference in the total democide, and thus the annual percentage rate of democide is revealing. By far, the most deadly of all communist countries and, indeed, in this century by far, has been Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot and his crew likely killed some 2,000,000 Cambodians from April 1975 through December 1978 out of a population of around 7,000,000. This is an annual rate of over 8 percent of the population murdered, or odds of an average Cambodian surviving Pol Pot's rule of slightly over just over 2 to 1.

In sum the communist probably have murdered something like 110,000,000, or near two-thirds of all those killed by all governments, quasi-governments, and guerrillas from 1900 to 1987. Of course, the world total itself it shocking. It is several times the 38,000,000 battle-dead that have been killed in all this century's international and domestic wars. Yet the probable number of murders by the Soviet Union alone--one communist country-- well surpasses this cost of war. And those murders of communist China almost equal it.

Yet again the statistics based on best factual oriented calculations demonstrate that your assertions about

RELIGION CAUSING the most mass deaths

is UTTERLY FALSE, WRONG, INACCURATE, NONSENSE.

This paragraph affirms my original guesstimation from my Chinese Communist sources of 130 million deaths:

Communism has been the greatest social engineering experiment we have ever seen. It failed utterly and in doing so it killed over 100,000,000 men, women, and children, not to mention the near 30,000,000 of its subjects that died in its often aggressive wars and the rebellions it provoked. But there is a larger lesson to be learned from this horrendous sacrifice to one ideology. That is that no one can be trusted with power. The more power the center has to impose the beliefs of an ideological or religious elite or impose the whims of a dictator, the more likely human lives are to be sacrificed. This is but one reason, but perhaps the most important one, for fostering liberal democracy. 

. . .
.

reply to post by DelMarvel


I Cor 12-14 has a different treatment compared to the Old Testament model.

The local congregation vets a prophetic utterance and declares it valid or invalid. There's no mention of stoning to death.

There is mention of being wary and avoidant of CLEARLY FALSE PROPHETS

There's mention of ignoring false pontifications.

There's no mention of stoning folks to death who are learning how to walk in their prophetic gifting or who get it wrong for whatever normal human failling reasons.

reply to post by DelMarvel


Yes. . . . though I'm not sure it's a consciously deliberate GOAL to bring attention to the topic. I think it's more an emotional verbal flailing about out of intense emotions about feeling that a bona fide valid Christian perspective has been maligned or squealched far too much, far too long, far too inaccurately and far too ruthlessly.

As a psychologist, I've often been fascinated with this annoying quirk of his.

Sometimes it seems like he's frustrated for a long period of time about some unfitting, out of balance, distorted, false etc. construction on Christian and/or political and/or prophetic reality . . . from his perspective.

So, then, he just blurts out some emotionally charged, often outrageous sort of wording that lights the pundits up far and wide.

I doubt he does it deliberately to cause attention to the topic. I think he does it out of intense inner frustration and angst.

He seems to speak without thinking . . . or with thinking that minimizes the consequences of his wording.

Some of his wording just sounds dumb, silly, irrational.

And, I'd guess that if he were confronted on some of them in private, he'd likely admit some degree of dumbness on some of such assertions.

I've heard him publically soften his wording somewhat sheepishly on some such comments.

On others, I've heard him stick to his guns in one sense or another while admitting that some off the wall interpretation of what he said was understandable, in a sense.

I do sometimes think that GOD USES that quirk of Pat's to get a topic more widly discussed in the body politic.

reply to post by Wotaneyed


How about THIS? Another "false flag"?

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

So you think the Muslims have the right answer?

Should Christians put out death threats and bombs and such, cause that seems to be your message.

Christianity isn't the only religion made fun of, not by a long shot.

I'm a Christian too, and I thought the way Jesus was portrayed on SNL was the kind of Jesus I prefer to believe in, and most people in the U.S. have excellent morals. Maybe you live in the wrong country, being that the rest of us and our kids are so immoral.

Personally, I don't think you or Pat have a clue as to what it means to be a Christian, and your eagerness to judge proves just that.

Excuse me, but I seem to be a bit offended here. It seems you are actually taking the liberty upon yourself to put words in my mouth. Not once did I say it would be righteous or correct for Christians to put out death threats or incite violence. I (and Pat) were merely pointing out that there is a double-standard with Christianity and Islam. He was implying that people don't make fun of Islam because there would be atrocities occurring if they did, so they just mosey on over to Christianity because they know the Christian crowd won't do anything drastic over it. Therein lies the double standard - it's basically - don't make fun of Islam because there will be serious issues. Maybe if someone is mentally retarded they could lead themselves to believe that Robertson is calling for violence in his comment.

As a side note. If you really believe the Jesus portrayed in an SNL skit is a proper fit for the savior of mankind and a suitable depiction of our lord and savior then you must be one whacked out liberal goon Christian. Couple this with your statement claiming people in the U.S. have good morals. Yeah, besides the sexually infused media outlets, teen to pre-teen sex become normalcy, high crime rates, corruption, etc. Then we have a really morally sound country here. Come on man.

Tell me you're playing devil's advocate here, PLEASE, because you're really pulling at straws here and trying to twist the entire quote up on its side.

And in response to your last line - eagerness to judge what exactly?

reply to post by LiberLegit

. . . so they just mosey on over to Christianity because they know the Christian crowd won't do anything drastic over it. Therein lies the double standard - it's basically - don't make fun of Islam because there will be serious issues. Maybe if someone is mentally retarded they could lead themselves to believe that Robertson is calling for violence in his comment.

Excellent points.

However, I have a quibble with this part:

". . . so they just mosey on over to Christianity because they know the Christian crowd won't do anything drastic over it."

That may have a slight amount to do with it.

I think the larger underlying REASON is a spiritual, factual one.

One never sees nor hears

(*)*&^(*&^ Buddha
)*&^)&)*&^Muhammed
_)*)&^%$*Vishnu
#@#&^^%Zoroaster

Why is Jesus the persistent and exclusive spiritual leader target of hostility, curses, etc?

Because satan has no interest in fostering attacks on his counterfeit spiritual leaders.

His beef is with God Almighty and with Christ over the conquest of The Cross and The Resurrection.

Satan's only recourse is to take as many souls as he can to hell to prevent them from joining God in Heaven. That's the only way he can retaliate for getting kicked out of Heaven.

I brought up the passage about stoning false prophets because of the Robertson Old Testament quote about stoning used in reference to UFO believers.

Of course, here we are running into the salad bar approach to the New Covenant/Old Covenant theory where you can choose or discard whatever you want from the Old Testament.

Let's go ahead and assign execution by stoning to the Old Covenant.

Nevertheless, the I Corinthians passage states that prophets are to be judged and it still logically connects with OT references to false prophets in the same way that similar scriptural connections are made every Sunday throughout Christendom.

As far as "learning how to walk in their prophetic gifting," Robertson is over 80 years old. He has no gift of prophecy and if he were a humbler man he would have recognized that decades ago.

reply to post by LiberLegit

If you really believe the Jesus portrayed in an SNL skit is a proper fit for the savior of mankind and a suitable depiction of our lord and savior then you must be one whacked out liberal goon Christian.

And you're offended? Back at ya buddy.

Couple this with your statement claiming people in the U.S. have good morals. Yeah, besides the sexually infused media outlets, teen to pre-teen sex become normalcy, high crime rates, corruption, etc. Then we have a really morally sound country here. Come on man.

You are way tooo obsessed with teen sex. Crime rates in the U.S. began to drop exponentially back in the nineties, and most of the crime in this country occurs in concentrated areas. Compared to the highly religious nations of this planet, crime rates are pretty low in the U.S..

I continue to disagree with your interpretations of what was said by Pat.