Skip to content

Satan is Pat Robertson’s Theological Mentor

January 14, 2010

Political correctness and collegiality be damned. Enough is enough: this is ridiculous. The 700 Club needs to be canceled, and someone needs to do me a favor and punch Pat Robertson in the face. Hard.

He has said some epically stupid things in his time, and I know that from time to time I can be a bit bombastic and overstated in my criticism of evangelicals as part of my online persona, but he really pissed me off today. I actually felt rage when I read his comments on Haiti.

Appropriately, Pat’s new idiocy has rocketed to number one on the Pat Robertson list of Top Ten Stupid Pat Quotes.

Pat Robertson, the evangelical Christian who once suggested God was punishing Americans with Hurricane Katrina, says a “pact to the devil” brought on the devastating earthquake in Haiti.Officials fear more than 100,000 people have died as a result of Tuesday’s 7.0-magnitude earthquake in Haiti.

Robertson, the host of the “700 Club,” blamed the tragedy on something that “happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it.”

The Haitians “were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever,” Robertson said on his broadcast Wednesday. “And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you will get us free from the French.’ True story. And so, the devil said, ‘OK, it’s a deal.’ “

The sheer ignorance, stupidity, and insensitivity in the face of such tragedy and pain are hard to comprehend. The intellectual and spiritual arrogance flaunted with a look down the nose shows so little compassion it is impossible to believe that human beings would listen to the ramblings of such a fool who clearly borders on a  double digit IQ.

A hundred thousand people may have lost their lives…

A hundred thousand? I can’t even fathom that.

And Pat, who is clearly dead inside, asserts in the grossest, most foul statement I have heard in a long time that it is because of a pack with the Devil these people died… from two hundred years ago! I wonder how all the thousands and thousand of Haitian people who lost parents, sons, daughters, friends, relatives, wives, and husbands feel about that you sick, insensitive prick.

The man should be banned from TV, never interviewed or taken seriously again, kicked out of the States, and forced to live in Haiti and help the innocent victims of a terrible tragedy rebuild their lives, so that he might learn a little compassion and empathy for his fellow man.

What kind of conception of God does this man have? Pat Robertson’s God is a prick, a cosmic rogue, Loki with a mean streak, vindictive, and petty… oh yeah, and Republican/Conservative. In Pat’s sick world with a mean, demented, pissed-off God you get what you deserve; hell, you get more than you deserve. Heck, sometimes you get what someone else deserves multiplied by ten thousand.

In Jewish tradition there is a wonderful practice: tikkun olam which means “repairing the world.” This is done through tzedekah often translated as charity, but it is based on the root for the word justice or righteousness. I think Pat could learn a whole heck of a lot from our Jewish friends by dropping his ridiculous charade of knowing why bad things happen, and adopting the spirit of tikkun olam, and instead of telling the Haitians they deserved this terrible tragedy, perhaps, embracing them as they cry, feeling their pain, saying nothing, and help these poor people through this awful terrible tragedy.

If you’re not going to do that Pat then just stop talking. Please. I can’t take much more. You have about as much Christ-like love as Satan, and it is despicable.

31 Comments leave one →
  1. Fr Craig permalink
    January 14, 2010 6:47 am

    amen, and AMEN! read some history, Pat. what an idiot.

  2. January 14, 2010 6:57 am

    …a fool who clearly borders on a double digit IQ.

    So… you’re guessing around a 9? That seems generous, and slightly insulting to, say, the average head of cabbage.

  3. Josh permalink
    January 14, 2010 7:50 am

    Your over-the-top anger strikes me as an excellent example of righteous anger. I like the tikkun olam response as well, thanks for posting, I’m glad I read it.

  4. January 14, 2010 12:15 pm

    Amen and well said!

  5. January 14, 2010 1:22 pm

    Been steaming about this already today – glad you said this.

  6. nothuffington permalink
    January 14, 2010 3:11 pm

    It was a shocker alright, even if we should be ‘used’ to his inhuman ways by now. I saw another entry called, Jesus would kick you in the head, which made the point quite clear too.
    It’s time to react hard on Robertson this time.
    Thanks for the entry 🙂

  7. Cam permalink
    January 14, 2010 3:21 pm

    ….and to think I used to watch 700 Club years ago. The scary thing is that Pat is educated, which is why he is so dangerous. The one he influences is one too many. He’s a self-righteous bigot.

  8. Michael B permalink
    January 14, 2010 5:51 pm

    Apparently he’s referencing the Bois Caiman ceremony in 1791…it started a rebellion, and there was voodoo involved, which is why he called it a “pact with the devil.” I’m just stitching that together from the results of a google search, though, so I don’t know how much of what I read was accurate.

    So, while he remains a hateful, pitiable old fool, he isn’t completely pulling this out of his ass. Just most of it.

  9. January 15, 2010 1:13 am

    Yes, God did indeed have to punish Haiti. They were really living it up until this earthquake came along.

  10. brad culver permalink
    January 15, 2010 6:01 am

    Robertson can be a real ass… he’ notorious for saying stupid things. No wonder some folks get a little steamed under the collar at evangelicals…

  11. Dr. Jim permalink
    January 17, 2010 11:23 am

    Another gem from Jewish tradition. I don’t know the exact quote but Maimonides (I think) said the highest form of charity was not merely to give anonymously to people you do not know, but to give in such a way no one looses their dignity in the first place.

  12. No Fan of Pat's permalink
    January 17, 2010 8:00 pm

    So, prove Pat wrong.

    All you’ve done is attack Pat Robertson. You haven’t shown that what he said was false.

    Until you can disprove what Pat said, you can whine all you want about how such a God is a real jerk, and how Pat is one, too, for worshiping such a God, but my point still stands.

    You have not countered what Pat said. All you’ve done is go on your own tirade, which is more embarrassing and stupid than what Pat said.

  13. Jake permalink
    January 17, 2010 8:40 pm

    Kinda sounds like you are a “Fan of Pat’s”…

    Also, why is it that “Prove it” is always the resounding battle cry of both the militant atheist AND the right wing fundamentalist?

  14. No Fan of Pat's permalink
    January 18, 2010 5:51 am

    I have no idea what “the militant atheist AND the right wing fundamentalist” cry. I’m neither, and personally know neither of these.

    And my point remains.

    Prove that Haitians didn’t make such a pact.

    And if they did make such a pact, prove that God couldn’t or didn’t have anything to do with the earthquake as a consequence of such.

    Until then, Pat’s crazy idea has possibility, and can’t be rejected simply because one doesn’t like the idea. And who cares about Jewish tradition? An Israeli (?) rabbi said a couple yeras ago that the Holocaust was punishment for the Jews’ sins. Everyone did a Scotteriology-on-Pat-Robertson reaction, but that just ignores the question: Is it true?

    Go ahead, shoot the messenger if he indeed may be the messenger.

    But that just shows your ignorance, not your one-upsmanship.

    • January 18, 2010 6:01 am

      The historical evidence paints this as a neo-colonial myth which was adopted by the Haitians in the national myth, much the same way Americans believe that George Washington and Jesus had lunch.

      The ‘prayer’ given by the supposed leader of the ritual is not satanic, but is no more Christian than many of the Founding Father’s mentioning of God.

      The pact has been thoroughly discredited. Plus, it would kinda make God a hypocrite to punish and entire country for generations for something only a few supposedly did when He had made a pact with the devil as well.

      Pat Fan, the myth is a racist on in my opinion, and has contributed to much the Haitian mindset and those around them. Oh, and if someone brings up the ‘But the Dominican Republic shares the same island and they are doing so much better’ line, I’m going to scream.

    • January 18, 2010 8:59 am

      There is another issue to think through Pat Fan. The issue of speaking responsibly about others. To dismissively claim that the plight of the Haitians is resultant from a (yet to be proven) pact with Satan is like saying that it is ok this happened, they had it coming and we don’t need to respond. It entrenches a status quo response to human suffering. How does this in any way square with the gospel representation of Jesus, the same Jesus who goes out of his way to minister to demoniacs? It is basically a way for head-firmly-in-ass evangelicals (fortunately they are not the only kind out there) to feel good about their inaction as they passively await their fictitious rapture.

      As for the pact itself, the earliest record (20+ years later!) does not indicate a pact with Satan but rather a pact amongst a group to kill off all the whites. The sin of Haiti is to stand up against France. The response of Europe was economically crushing. Of course colonialist missions capitalized on this allowing them to try and route out voudun. I agree with Joel that the myth that arose about this pact is racist.

  15. No Fan of Pat's permalink
    January 18, 2010 9:12 am

    FYI, it’s “No Fan of Pat’s,” not “Pat Fan.”

    Because I am not a fan of Pat Robertson. He’s so old I barely remember who he is. That people even consider anything he said as being newsworthy is like posting remarks made by (may he rest in peace) Soupy Sales.

    This is the 21st century, not the 20th.

  16. January 18, 2010 9:38 am

    No Fan of Pat is actually someone named Pat. Hmmm. Could it be the man himself? Probably not, polysyllabic words are spelled properly, which is most likely beyond Robertson.

    I have to “disprove” Pat? Wouldn’t Pat have to “prove” something first? Offering a theory is “proving” nothing. Obviously, the simple basics of burden of proof and argumentation are beyond your grasp, but I will give you a little.

    A) Neither Pat nor myself have access to “proof” of God or the Devil’s involvement at Haiti. We cannot put God or the Devil on trial, and make them swear an oath to tell us the truth. We do not have access to their diaries, or to any video surveillance. Therefore, the best we can do is theories. That is what Pat has offered us: a theory. He has “proven” nothing. A theory that the nation of Haiti was horribly corporately punished for the sins of a few fathers. A nation with a large population of Catholic and Pentecostal Christians was corporately murdered for the sins of a few from a couple of hundred years ago. I’m not sure how you claim Pat has “proven” that. I cannot “disprove” what has not in any way been “proven.”

    B) I would respond to Pat from within the tradition he supposedly represents. I would start with Gen 18:25 “Will not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” My starting point here is that God will do the right thing. This supposes that God’s ideal of justice is greater than my own fallible human ideal of punishment and retributive justice where I “get them” for what they have done.

    Second I would also consider the idea of retributive justice in the OT. Ezekiel 18:19-20 “Yet you [Pat] say, “Why should not the son [Haiti] suffer for the iniquity of the father [ancestors pact with the devil]?” When the son has done what is lawful and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The person who sins shall die. A child shall not suffer for the iniquity of a parent, nor a parent suffer for the iniquity of a child; the righteousness of the righteous shall be his own, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be his own.” Even in the OT there is a progression away from the “theology” of Pat.

    Last in the Christian tradition (which Pat is supposed to be in and should understand) I would suggest that the most important theological development is that Jesus is the fullest revelation of God, and the final litmus test for our “theories” about how God is acting in the world, “Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.”

    This is simple orthodoxy: Jesus is fully God and fully man, and reveals to us what God is truly like: “He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being.” “He is the image of the invisible God.”

    Therefore, when terrible events happen like Haiti, and I am asked to put on my theologian hat, I look at the life of Jesus and consider whether Jesus was the sort of man that went around causing devastation in people’s life to “make a point.” When I search the gospels I find this isn’t the case: Jesus came to heal and bind up the broken-hearted not to retributively punish people and show them how wrong they were. As a theologian I do not wish to bifurcate the Godhead so I conclude that if Jesus was not this sort of person then God is not that sort of person.

    Pat should know this, but I suspect he is more interested in his political ideologies and power brokering than reflecting the humble Galilean rabbi. Can’t really get too rich or go too far in politics following him.

    C) “You have not countered what Pat said. All you’ve done is go on your own tirade, which is more embarrassing and stupid than what Pat said.”

    Wow. For you to think I have to “counter” Pat, and to not do so is “embarrassing and stupid,” well, I have probably wasted my time already… but to not understand the issue to begin with, and then end with an ad hominem attack: poorly played No Fan, poorly played.

    • WenatcheeTheHatchet permalink
      January 18, 2010 2:30 pm

      I have pointed out to some people who have defended Robertson that there is such a thing as a satanic role that can be played by Christians (Jesus rebuked Peter with “Get behind me Satan”, obviously). When rebuking Jesus for saying he had to meet suffering and death Christ called Peter Satan. When Robertson and others make declarations that whole nations have gained calamity due to pacts made with Satan this not only fails to account for Ezekiel (which I suspected you’d mention eventually) it also is an act in itself which exemplifies a quintessentially satanic function, to level accusations. Now in Job that is presented more or less as Satan’s job and in Zechariah 3.

      If Not a Pat Fan is a Reformed Baptist cessationist then those Pentecostals and Catholics may just be going to hell because they don’t adhere to the doctrines of grace but I doubt Not a Pat Fan is automatically a Reformed Baptist cessationist since there’s no evidence to prove it. Proceeding as though NaPF were, though, would fit the precedent set by Robertson’s public statements.

      Simply on the basis of the golden rule we could point out that what Robertson said is deeply problematic. Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you in Robertson’s application apparently means declaring that a whole nation warrants poverty because of a pact with Satan made years ago. Did he say anything comparable about how founding fathers brought judgment on the United States via Freemasonry? Or about Jeffersonian editing down of the Bible to remove the unsavory parts? The three-fifths compromise?

      Now far be it from me to say Robertson has only ever said stupid stuff. His criticism of conservatives for taking too hard a stance on immigration when scripture says we should be compassionate to the alien and the orphan was good to say. And for all we know in twenty years someone like Mark Driscoll could be the one putting his foot in his mouth a la Patster. We don’t know. You don’t know who seems innocuous enough or merely aggravating now can spiral downhill over time. I remember when Robertson seemed, well, less like a crazy old man. Still, the Door was monitoring his verbal exploits back then, too.

  17. No Fan of Pat's permalink
    January 18, 2010 4:18 pm

    The Door.

    Owned and run by Ole Anthony.

    Another scam artist and cult leader and hypocrite. I.e., he loved exposing televangelists, while he ran an autocratic cult and engaged in and justified his sexual misdeeds.

    Of course, maybe you were referring to the pre-Ole days – i.e., The Door under Mike Yaconelli.

    • WenatcheeTheHatchet permalink
      January 18, 2010 4:36 pm

      I was referring to the Yaconelli days. After his death I stopped reading the magazine because it just wasn’t the same magazine to me anymore. I don’t know that you don’t consider the late Yaconelli to have been a scam artist and a cult-leader, too, though, so I’m not sure it matters what period of the Door’s history I refer to.

  18. January 18, 2010 4:38 pm

    Maybe the Door (first time I’ve heard of this organization) was employing the famous: takes one to know one philosophy. 🙂

    I had my fill of Christian heresy hunter BS back in the 80s.

    There is no need to prove or disprove Pat’s claims, the issue at stake is whether or not he was an asshole for making such a claim publically. I think that Scott has effectively argued that this is so from a biblical perspective (no less). Who cares if he is orthodox or heterodox – that isn’t the issue. It is a matter of human decency and Pat has failed that mark repeatedly.

    So where do you go from there? Perhaps that is the better route to take. I think we should encourage Pat to examine his actions and the forum that he has assumed, and I would encourage him to just as publically repent of the way he has fostered apathy towards a humanitarian crisis.

    • January 18, 2010 5:00 pm

      “Scott has effectively argued that this is so from a biblical perspective (no less).”

      Do I perceive surprise with the “no less” Frank? 😉

      • January 18, 2010 5:15 pm

        Let’s just say that was some nice stick handling. 😉

        • WenatcheeTheHatchet permalink
          January 18, 2010 5:21 pm

          Excepting No Fan of Pat we all agree on that, I think. 🙂

    • January 19, 2010 8:36 am

      Wait.. what…?

      This is a bible blog?

      I thought “agathos” was a pseudonym for a washed-out comedian.

      I was guessing “Carrot-Top.”

  19. Dave Down Under permalink
    January 18, 2010 6:04 pm

    Everything else aside, the sad thing to me in respect to Robertson’s comments is the human propensity – exacerbated in evangelical Christianity – to try to find simplistic answers to complex problems.

    The uprising of the Haitian slaves against France… France deciding to sell some of its land holdings around the world… The Louisiana Purchase which created many States in the US for around 3 cents an acre (the US owes a LOT to Haiti)… the inability of the Haitians to buy themselves out of the “ownership” of the French colonialists, so the subsequent loaning of money from around the world – including the US – at exorbitant interest… the support of Papa Doc and Baby Doc by the United States because “their politics were right” even though their record on human rights was beyond tragic…

    It just goes on and on – and yet someone like Pat thinks they can distill 200 years of history, financial rape of Haiti by democratic nations around the world, plunder by corporations and individuals (many who would call themselves “Christian”), greed, politics, etc., etc., to one simple idea – “Oh yeah, they had this voodoo ceremony, and it’s all bad now because of that”.

    That’s my issue with Pat’s statement. It is excruciatingly, mind-numbingly simplistic.

    To be asked to “disprove” his statement only demonstrates that the inane, absurd, over-simplified nature of it was not recognized to begin with.

  20. ajay permalink
    January 18, 2010 10:43 pm

    The Devil Sues Pat Robertson for Breach of Contract


  1. Balafon » Morons to the Right of Them, Morons to the Left of Them
  2. More on Pat Robertson’s Comments on the Earthquake in Haiti « Simul Iustus et Peccator

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: