Pat Robertson: We’re As Good As Dead

According to the almighty prophet Pat Robertson, many of us who live in major US cities are about to be snuffed out.

His prediction, or rather, “message from God”, states that there will be a “mass killing” in late 2007.

The all knowing whacko master stated, “The Lord didn’t say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that.”

So what do you think? Is the silver hair fox onto something here? Have any of you heard God mention a major terrorist attack in any of your recent conversations with Him? Or is Mr. Robertson’s prediction as good as saying, “I think that it may rain sometime next year, somewhere in the US….and I’m told it will be wet rain.”

11 Comments so far

  1. smouie kablooie (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 6:18 pm

    I think a better question is will he be a victim of the mass killing? Not that I wish a terminal fate on anyone, but seriously, when will this guy be shut out from mainstream media’s attention?


  2. Joshua Harry Yospyn (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 6:45 pm

    He’ll be shut out of the mainstream when the mainstream becomes the loudspeaker of the secular movement. At the moment, they’re very pro-deity. CNN and the Washington Post will do anything for a dollar. But when atheists and agnostics take over the Earth, Pat Robertson will feel the boot of truth. So do your part and stop worshipping superheroes. It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s…it’s…not logical.


  3. TLJC (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 7:49 pm

    Wow, I had to look up about 5 of those words, Harry. Are you saying that if we ignore our problems they will go away or that you actually worship Pat Robertson? I think YOU told him about the terrorist attack. You did, didn’t you?


  4. IntangibleArts (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 9:32 pm

    teehee. God People are so cute.


  5. Stacey (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 9:39 pm

    I would just like to say, not in realation to the above comments, but in general…

    … it needs to be said that Pat Robertson does not represent all Bible-believe/active/evangelical/born-agains/whatever-you-want-to-call-it Christians. As one of the above stated, Pat Robertson does not represent me and certainly does not represent the great majority (real: none) of the other Bible-believing Christians I know, go to church with, or do life with.

    I know that nobody asserted that, but the man makes a bad name for all evangelicals and it’s ridiculous that a) he continues to and b) that some (not all) believe that he represents any sort of majority.

    I wish I could see more humor in it, but he’s so ridiculous that it fires me up… and few things do:).


  6. Popcorn Magic (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 9:56 pm

    Whether you are religious or not, only the terrorists know when their next attack will be. For Pat Robertson to claim that the Lord told him is just plain mental.


  7. Don (unregistered) on January 3rd, 2007 @ 9:57 pm

    I don’t think that Kooky Robertson represents most or even many of the religious folk in this country, but it sure would be nice to see more religious leaders denouncing this kind of nonsense. Maybe they are and it’s just not getting reported on, but it’s disheartening to see his jackholery reported and unchallenged.


  8. chris (unregistered) on January 4th, 2007 @ 9:54 am

    If he’s not representing a large number of “christians,” then he’s representing a few really really wealthy ones. Somebody must be supporting this whacko, I don’t think he’s working at the local factory by day and then preaching to the choir by night. There are a lot of crazy people in this country and I’m afraid of the inevitable theocracy that we’re spinning toward.


  9. Tiff (unregistered) on January 4th, 2007 @ 11:10 am

    To respond to Don’s point, I think there are a couple of reasons you don’t see more denouncing of Pat Robertson from other Christian quarters:

    1. There’s a Biblical admonition for Christians to live in peace with people generally and with other believers in particular. So the Christians most likely to find Pat Robertson abrasive and in violation of that standard are the ones likely to be most careful about not violating it themselves, and are therefore less likely to denounce him *personally* and *publically*. In other words, in order to make enough of a fuss about him to get the same amount of attention and beat him at his own game, we’d have to turn into him, which would defeat the whole purpose, no?

    2. When people try to denounce him in ways that do conform to their best understanding of the way Christians should treat one another (confronted gently, and ideally in private), it doesn’t sell as many papers as “9/11 was brought upon us by homosexuals and feminists does.” It’s less colorful, and therefore less newsworthy.

    3. As a result, there’s a (futile, in my opinion) hope that if we ignore him long enough, eventually he’ll give up and go away like any other bully.

    So basically, as much as we want the world to know that he doesn’t represent all of us, our hands are kind of tied by the very morality that sets us apart from him. And I’m not saying that there aren’t better ways to do it that are still within the realm of Christian acceptability, but I AM saying that it’s hard to get wide agreement on that.


  10. chris (unregistered) on January 4th, 2007 @ 11:28 am

    There’s a lot of biblical admonitions that a lot of christians ignore, I think denouncing an ass like Pat Roberstson would be one that christians should add to their list.

    As for living in peace, good luck getting that one by the fact checkers.


  11. Tiff (unregistered) on January 4th, 2007 @ 12:50 pm

    Without getting into a debate about what we supposedly “ignore” since this is neither the time nor the place…

    This is the part where I again point out that a small group of individuals engaging in assholitry will always be more visible and newsworthy than the larger group of people engaging in acts of kindness and mercy. Hence it’s just as ridiculous to assume that Pat Robertson is representative of Christians generally as it is to assume that Osama bin Laden is representative of Muslims generally (someone’s got to be funding him too, right?), or that trolls showing up in blog comments to mock other peoples’ belief in God are representative of atheists generally.

    In short, some people are just assholes (or crazy) and will use any excuse to make trouble, advance their personal agendas, whatever. Meanwhile, groups of people engaging in charity or respectful debate don’t sell newspapers. Controversy and outrage do. Guess who you’ll hear more about?



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.