Friday, November 11, 2005

Pat Robertson Is at It Again.

Conservative Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting "intelligent design" and warned them Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck.

Dear Mr. Robertson,

Please shut up.

Sincerely,

Phil

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

His remarks are upsetting because deep down Christians are really thinking the same thing, but would never say it out loud.

Shawn

Tiffany said...

Shawn-
Are you a Christian who thinks these things? Or are you not a Christian who thinks Christians think the same thing? Or was that a joke I just missed?

Pat Robertson needs to go re-read the story of Jesus and the blind man in John 9.

Anonymous said...

No, sadly it's no joke. I'm a life-long Christian who no longer speaks the language. I find the righteous indignation toward Robertson painfully ironic.

Shawn

Phil said...

Shawn, are you saying that you think I feel the same way that Robertson does and that my indignation towards it is ironic because of that?

And just out of curiosity, when you say that you no longer speak the language, do you mean Christianese?

Anonymous said...

Phil, no, it's more of a broad indictment. I think that this has historically been the perception of christendom as a whole, and correctly so. I understand that more progressive modern evangelicals recgonize that Robertson is a nut and don't take him seriously.

Those same people, however, are the same people who believe Jesus was a republican and line my chuch parking lot with "W" stickers. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being politically conservative, but we want to assign our politcs to our God. Most of us don't go so far as to say God is going to strike us down with a natural disater, but when it comes to these issues (school prayer, creationism, etc.) I think our opinions are closer to Robertson's that we would be ready to admit.

Yes, Phil, I think Christianese is pretty close to what I mean. And I mean all of it. I don't relate to the hard-line old school thee's and thou's, and I also don't relate with the more modern language of love and grace either. It would take a much longer than I have room for here to explain, so I'll just say it's lost all relevance. Sorry, that's probably way too vague of an explanation.

Shawn

Anonymous said...

I, for one, am glad that he keeps speaking his mind. He isn't dangerous that way. What scares me is people who think such thoughts and don't hint that such hatred is in their hearts.

Robertson's comments just show that the religious right (which includes the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest denomination in the US) is filled with people (Christians) who are judgmental, arrogant and condescending toward the rest of the world.

Amanda said...

Hummm....

I'm a conservative Christian.

I'm a scientist.

So if I say that I agree with Phil that Robertson needs to shut up what does that mean????

I'll tell you what it means: It means that I'm a scientist who is also a conservative Christian that thinks Pat Robertson needs to shut up. Robertson would doubt my Christianity if I told him what I thought about intelligent design and evolution........

BTW, when did Christianity ever stop being about Jesus????

Anonymous said...

Amanda, I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but Jesus was not a conservative. He didn't oppose taxation, he had no craving for power, and he didn't care about individual rights.

I'm not really sure I understand the question about Christianity and Jesus, but I'd say it was when we decided that we were the world's moral police.

Shawn

Brandon Scott said...

Shawn-
Your indictments are probably right, but you're preaching to the choir here. If you're looking for a debate, you're barking up the wrong tree (not that any of us wouldn't love a chance to debate...it's just a waste of time since we probably are more alike than dissimilar.)

Phil--amen and amen. (in Christianese that means you go girl.)

Pat--please, for the love, shut your trap.

Anonymous said...

Brandon Scott,
Based on comments I've read in the past, I don't think I'm barking up the wrong tree. I'm not just looking for a pointless debate, I'm attempting to establish honest dialogue. Phil asked for concrete suggestions and I did that. Tiffany and Amanda asked some direct questions and I chimed in.

Also, it seems to me that the whole point of blogs like this IS debate, otherwise Phil would just keep this in an unpublished journal. I've read for a long time in silence, and if my comments reflecting my honest opinions given without malice are not welcome, I can just go back to reading in silence. My intentions are not just to argue for the sake of argument. I have reasons for staying relatively anonymous, which is why I only use my first name.

Shawn

Phil said...

Shawn, one of the points of this blog is absolutely for debate.

I hope you don't go back to reading in silence. Your voice is one I want to hear and dialogue with and I think what you've offered on the two posts you've responded to have made me think about why I think and believe what I do, so for that I thank you.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Phil. The reason I chose to "come out" on your blog is because I really like the attitude you take in your discussions. You are obviously confident in your beliefs, yet very open-minded and unthreatened when questioned on them. It makes it very attractive to make comments.

I didnt' mean to make it sound like I was going to take my little red wagon and go home (I realize it sounded like that after I re-read it). Anyway, thanks.

Shawn

Phil said...

Shawn, I mean what I'm about to say in all seriousness. This quote: "You are obviously confident in your beliefs, yet very open-minded and unthreatened when questioned on them" may be the finest compliment I've ever gotten.

Thank you.

Amanda said...

Shawn,

I need to clarify a couple of things.

I think you mistook my "conservative" for "politically conservative." Or maybe not...but what I meant by "conservative Christian" is theologically conservative Christian. I guess the difficult thing about that phrase is that "conservative" is subjective...you can only judge conservative and liberal from where you are.

Anyway, and my last statement about "when did Christianity stop being about Jesus?" means that sometimes we focus on too many things about religion that aren't important. Christianity has become, to an extent, more about our works and our political stance than it has about our relationship with Him.

Anonymous said...

Amanda,
Thanks for clarifying. I guess now I would ask what you mean by a theologically conservative Christian. I think even that can mean differnt things depending upon perspective.

Also, I agree we often focus on things in religion that are unimportant. However, I would contend that our works (not in a legalistic way, but in general how we live our lives) are the most important part of our Christian lives. The language of relationship does not resonate with me. I think I know what you mean by it, but I would disagree that that is the ultimate goal.

Now, if you mean that doing the things that were important to Jesus (taking care of the poor, befriending the friendless, bringing about social justice, etc.) brings us to relationship with him, then I agree with its importance.

Shawn

Template Designed by Douglas Bowman - Updated to Beta by: Blogger Team
Modified for 3-Column Layout by Hoctro