Home > Faith, Thoughts > Seriously? Pat Robertson? Seriously?

Seriously? Pat Robertson? Seriously?

It is bad enough that your theology is atrocious… must you really play the “God’s Wrath” card within 24 hours of the most devastating natural disaster since the tsunami.

I would break down all the theological errors and examples of eisegesis in this argument that God is punishing the Haitians, but the hateful, tactless Pat Robertson does not even deserve a response.

  1. January 13th, 2010 at 19:22 | #1

    I wonder if you’re not overreacting a little. Tactless, for sure. But does lack of tact warrant such a swift condemnation and grievous silent treatment? It was, in fact, the lack of adequate response to over-zealous, under-thought out “explanations” such as his that really had me frustrated and confounded w/ Christianity a couple years back. If the concept that God is actually responsible for Tsunami and Quake is really so erroneous, then how can Calvinists continue to flourish without being properly engaged by an adequate “arminian” rebuttal?

    And, at least from this clip, praying that those afflicted would turn to God and that God, indeed, can make good out of this evil seems hardly so egregious as I’ve heard people make out so far. That’s not to say Robertson had any business opining on the subject so soon after the fact, especially on international news, but rather than fuming under the burden of feeling somehow responsible for his ignorant comments, I simply recognize he doesn’t – and cannot – speak for me.

  2. January 16th, 2010 at 11:48 | #2

    religious fundamentalisms to market fundamentalisms – naomi klein warns of disaster capitalism and heritage foundation’s interest to expand corporate wealth and increase Haiti’s crisis.



    on a more positive note – support Partners in Health who recognize that Haiti is experiencing more than a natural disaster.


  3. January 17th, 2010 at 11:30 | #3


    I think the messenger is an important as the message here. If this was coming from someone who was known for their sincere engagement of theology and orthopraxis than I would certainly have responded differently. Instead, it is coming from a person known for their broad generalizations, rampant publicity seeking and a perpetual foot-in-the-mouther. Its the same reason I don’t get too pissed about what Michael Savage says… everyone knows he is a nutjob.

    There have been good responses to this. The one I have repeatedly seen cited is from Donald Miller: http://donmilleris.com/2010/01/13/1513/

    The main problem with Robertson’s response is not his criticism of the people of Haiti during their time of need, but rather that his approach makes us look at every horrible thing in our life as a punishment from God. It is much like when the disciples asked of the blind man “Who’s fault is it, his or his parents.” Sometimes (always?) the answer is “Neither!”

    Robertson is considered one of the faces of Christianity. Most people know he does not speak for all Christians, but it is ridiculous that these comments make news rather than the outpouring of thankless support that Christians (and non-christians) across the globe have given.

  4. January 17th, 2010 at 16:26 | #4

    I agree! Good response. I’ll read the Miller response soon.

    Here’s another good one: http://janotec.typepad.com/terrace/2010/01/far-as-the-curse-is-found.html

    It really is too bad that this guy continues to make the news. But, in a way, it’s to be expected. The current trend in media is to stir up the pot as much as possible when faith, religion, etc. are the ingredients.

    Have you ever read David Bentley Hart? His book on the Tsunami really altered my concept of “theodicy” and how to approach it.

  1. No trackbacks yet.