I think I have a fairly strong command of the English language, but I cannot come up with an adequate adjective to describe the colossally embarrassing and inappropriate quality of Pat Robertson’s comments today.
I don’t know why I still get exercised when Pat Robertson says something like this. By now I should know enough to treat it like a flatulent outburst: you have to stop long enough to recognize the fact that, yes, something unpleasant just took place, but then politely go about your business and pretend that nothing happened.
One of my mentors-at-a-distance, Greg Koukl, often observes that the content of the gospel is offensive all by itself, but that offense must be preserved if one is to be faithful. So if you’re going to offend someone in the name of Jesus Christ, take a cue from Brit Hume and cause an uproar over the reality of forgiveness (which implies the offensive reality of guilt):
Why is the Gospel—the “Good News”—so offensive? I think it’s because the Gospel is only good news once you understand the bad news. For most folks, the bad news—that we stand before God guilty and justly condemned—is on par with the repellent ramblings of a washed-up televangelist. The difference is that the news of our guilt is credible. Fortunately, the good news of the Gospel is just as credible and powerful in its announcement of forgiveness and hope.
It can even redeem Pat Robertson.
Filed under: hughbiquitous
Robertson should have been stoned as a false prophet years ago!
Here’s another gospel being linked to the disaster…
What is it about the statement that is so offensive?
I think it is factually inaccurate, but you can’t deny the crushing poverty of Haiti has been pervasive for a long time. I think it is important to put this into biblical perspective which is to say that it is not just the “Haitian pact with the devil” that is the cause; but my own sin. So maybe some personal responsibility?