Robertson calls for Israelis to "arm" the Temple Mount and "have a show of force"
October 26, 2009 7:27 pm ET
From the October 26 edition of Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Horse coming down from heaven? Nonsense. Turning water into wine? Christian fact. I really don't see how one is more likely than another.
Israel is anything but weak - it has fought off six countries simultaneously and is considered the leading force today behind advanced millitary technology.
Palestinians flock to jerusalem - there are something around 35 percent of the population or more. If they want to riot, they will be arrested. Otherwise, as far as I know, they seem to enjoy living there so they shouldn't be rioting in a city. Thats how thousands die and then, Israel is criticized by the UN for defending itself again.
Abram (Abraham) was to sacrifice Isaac, not Ishmael.
Another interesting fact about the 'sacrifice' is that if you read carefully (without Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell/others 'filtering'), when Abraham came down from the sacrifice of the lamb, there's no word on whether Isaac was with him. (That comes from the fact that the story, like much of the Bible, was made up by combining two stories - like the Creation story and others.)
"lying greedy chicken hawks "
i need to write that down!
What is a show based on religion doing pedaling war tendacies?
Opps I am sorry the CBN is not a religious network. It is a joke!
Patty-boy is an "end-timer". He would push the big red button himself if he thought it would cause the second coming of Christ.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15044.htm
but they are THAT important.
clowns
This coming from a feeble-minded racist who follows a guy who roamed the area 2000 years ago doing magic tricks.
Some even propose that the story of Jesus is eerily familiar to Horus, the Egyptian god. (see links)
Good night, Grandpa. Good night, John-boy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/horus.htm
Pat Roberton’s remarks in the video above are simply unbelievable.
‘It has belonged to the Jews since about 1,000 BC; it does not belong to the so-called ‘Palestinians...’’
The term ‘so-called Palestinians’ is outrageous. Robertson means that, because scripture references an archaic Jewish ownership of the land of Israel, Palestinian claims of citizenship or existence there are not just inaccurate; they are morally wrong. That is, there is not such group as the ‘Palestinian’ people: there are only Arabs, ‘drugged roaches in a bottle’ who should live wherever we see fit. Nevermind that Palestinians have lived on and cultivated the land for centuries. By virtue of their habitation of the land over 2000 years ago, Jewish people are entitled to ownership of all of Israel, regardless of anything that transpired in the past 2 millennia.
An argument reliant on Jewish divine right to Israel is simply irrelevant, because the people who must be convinced by such an argument do not subscribe to the religion from which it is derived. Muslims are not simply agnostic toward Jewish beliefs regarding Israel (in which case they might rationally forfeit all claims to Israel for the sake of peace, although this is entirely unjust, and solutions are largely the prerogative of the Palestinians themselves). Instead, Palestinians have the same religious conviction and fever for their claims to Palestine as the Jewish people do to the state of Israel. Simply claiming ‘my Holy text says this land belongs to me’ cannot scrub out the fact that the land has been occupied by another people for over 1500 years. Why should the claims of one religion be preferred over another?
We can draw parallels based on the only remaining aspect of the Israeli claim to Palestinian lands – former inhabitation. American Indians, for example - undeniably the original inhabitants of the modern United States – must have a total claim of ownership and jurisdiction over the continent, and so called ‘Americans’ are unwelcome overstayers. Likewise, the Mayan people can lay claim to California, Texas, New Mexico etc, as the original inhabitants, and therefore present-day rightful owners.
And it is the same logic – Jews, American Indians, Mayans, Incas - because once you set aside divine right, the only relevant remaining fact in regards to resolution of the Palestinian problem is the former Jewish habitation.
‘And to say [the Temple Mount] is one of the holy sites of Islam is pure fiction.’
Why? Because the idea that Mohammed ascended to heaven from the Temple Mount is, quote, ‘all nonsense’ and ‘based on fantasy.’ Robertson clearly doesn’t realise it, but this is unusually dangerous territory for any person of faith. It’s one thing to assert your faith is the Only Truth. But why is Mohammed riding a horse to heaven any more or less plausible than Noah building an arc? Or Eve forming from Adam’s ribs? Or Moses parting the Red Sea? Or Lot’s wife turning to a pillar of salt for casting a glance at Sodom?? Robertson here is scoffing at a Muslim belief regarding a holy miracle because he doesn’t think it is a realistic story. Well Pot, meet Kettle. Attacking the plausibility of a story of faith is a bizarrely ridiculous method of reasoning for a person of equivalent faith. And regardless, simply saying ‘I don’t believe it happened’ doesn’t make the Temple Mount any more or less holy in the eyes of 1 billion Muslims.
‘The Jews ...ought to arm it, and have a show of force, and not give way... once you have that kind of weakness [a readiness to negotiate] then have you conflict.’
This last statement is profoundly ignorant. If you want to start a wave of violence possibly more intense than anything we have seen in the last 61 years in Israel, the quickest way is probably to threaten Arab access to the Temple Mount. Pat Robertson is warning against conflict, but is clearly seeking the shortest path to it.
Patty wants to see Armageddon, because he's an end timer.
These deranged wackos are dangerous. Neo-cons are end timers.
Here's a great documentary with a description of end timers at:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15044.htm