What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by steve » Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:20 pm

There would seem to be three possible reasons for objecting to a statement like that made by Pat Robertson: First, if it is inaccurate; Second, if it is motivated other than by love; and Third, if it has potential to incite harm. I am not able to demonstrate (nor am I so uncharitable as to assume without evidence) that any of these three conditions apply in the present case.

My thoughts about Robertson's statement (as expressed on The Road to Find Out) are:

1. Robertson has every right to believe in the devil, and to say so—even if secularists find this to be naive and superstitious in this modern age;

2. Those who believe in the devil do tend to attribute malevolent motives to him, so that his infliction of disaster would be something in keeping with his character, in general;

3. Pat Robertson believes that a pact was made between an earlier generation of Haitians and the devil around the time of their successful revolt against the French (I don't know what his source is for this information, but I wouldn't assume it to be ridiculous until I could examine his sources);

4. Pat Robertson believes that the devil has inflicted poverty, political chaos and natural disaster on Haiti ever since this pact was made, and that the recent earthquake is yet another instance of this.

5. I do not know that these things are true; nor do I know that they are false;

6. If his sources are reliable, I can find no fault with his stating his beliefs on this, even if I am not persuaded that such a connection can be established between the said "pact" and any given subsequent disaster;

7. Even if I determined that Robertson's sources were unreliable, I don't know that he is to be blamed for thinking them reliable—if he has examined evidence to that effect, and reasonably trusts it;

8. Nothing in Pat's statements represent or misrepresent the character of God, since Pat did not make any statements about God;

9. Nothing in Pat's statements impute guilt for the earthquake to any present-day Haitians;

10. Nothing in Pat's statements can in any way be said to express lack of sympathy or compassion toward the Haitians (in fact, they were made in the context of appealing for Christians to send aid to the victims).

So far as I can discern, the negative reactions to Pat's statements have been of three types:

1. Those of people who do not believe in the devil's activities (nor in the devil's existence) at all, and who therefore see Pat Robertson as a nut because of his adherence to a biblical worldview—quite apart from the matter of Haiti;

2. Those of people who do believe in the devil's present-day activities, but who are not convinced that this earthquake is a case of such, and who are not persuaded even that Pat's historical information can be confirmed (many of whom, like myself, have not necessarily checked—and would not know where to check—to see if there is any factual basis for his statements);

3. Those who react irrationally and viscerally to what sounds like yet another embarrassing, superstitious and politically incorrect statement by yet another television evangelist (a class who have made a career of embarrassing the Christian public for decades), though the critic is unable to prove the statement false, and cannot give a reason why Pat should not say such a thing, if he thinks it true.

I am not a fan of Pat Robertson, nor of tele-evangelists as a group. However, I have not reacted negatively to Pat's statements, because I don't know them to be false (nor do I know them to be true). If they are true, there would seem to be nothing in them to object to. If they are false (and I do not know how to demonstrate them to be false), I can see no malice nor potential for harm in one's believing them. If Pat can be blamed at all for his statements, it may be that he expressed them as if expressing a belief held among Christians, without implying that it would not be universally believed by all Christians. On this score, however, every preacher can be faulted at one time or another.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by darinhouston » Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:52 pm

I watched a youtube video of his comments, and I'm afraid I've turned to Steve's side on this (and thanks Steve for turning me from my initial visceral reaction of embarrassment based on his prior comments). What really turned me, tough, was seeing MSNBC's comments -- the way they completely missed what he said and the ignorance they showed in distinguishing between him blaming those innocents today vs. their forefathers who brought it on them, and also the suggestion that the earthquake itself was the wrath of God - first, as Steve has said, he didn't say it was God who did this -- he wasn't even talking about the earthquake but the poverty and despair they found themselves in prior to the earthquake over the years; and second, he didn't even really say directly that it was the devil who did it but that they made a mistake getting out of the protections of the French in favor of the devil. Finally, atheists just will never understand when a Christian says the "people of Haiti" will be better off if they can turn to God (failing especially to see that he may even not be talking about those alive today in Haiti but to the people, in general, and perhaps even later generations).

User avatar
christopher
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:50 pm

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by christopher » Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:04 am

Well, this is one of those rare times I'm going to have to disagree with you Steve.

I can't say anything about Robertson's motives, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. But my question is, whether the pact with the devil is true or not, why even bring it up? Especially now. I see no value in it and it certainly doesn't help the situation. I can totally see why it was construed the way it was, especially in a world already jaded by reckless and un-Chrislike comments of the past. Certainly Mr Robertson is not ignorant of his reputation to outsiders.

Jesus told his disciples to be "wise as serpents and harmless as doves", it appears to most (including me) that Pat has this backwards (no offense to doves)

It seems to me that during times of crisis, Christians (and especially Christian leaders with an audience of millions) would be wiser to speak through their actions rather than waxing prophetic with useless anecdotes.

I'm sorry, but I still think that the comments were not only useless and insensitive, but they did indeed incite harm, especially to the millions of Christians who are trying to build friendships and demonstrate the grace of God to unbelievers in their offices and campuses. To me, it doesn't matter what Pat's motives or his sources were, or if his words were wrestled out of context by the media. The comment was totally unnecessary and the perception that now remains in everyone's mind is just another damaging obstacle to the true message of the gospel.

I think Pat Robertson would do well to apologize to a world he has offended, whether he meant to or not.

User avatar
TK
Posts: 1477
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by TK » Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:04 pm

Hi Christopher-

I can certainly agree with the sentiment you are expressing. The only problem, however, is when then should a Christian speak what sometimes is a hard truth? Haiti was obviously in the news, and Pat R comments on the news- that is part of what he does.

If i remember correctly- Pat said that perhaps the quake was a "blessing in disguise." Now i could see how the world might take such a comment, but the Christian should very easily be able to agree with this comment, because it may in fact be the truth. God can use disasters like this for good- and I trust that He will (i am already hearing stories of Christian relief teams who are seeing many conversions). Because Haiti, prior to the earthquake, was a rather dark place with very little going for it in any respect- for years and years and years. Maybe a real shaking was the only thing that would turn the tide. In this case it was a literal shaking- but it could have taken any form.

I am not one to propose that God caused the earthquake, as noted in my earlier post. Let's say it wasn't the devil either- just "plate tectonics in a fallen world" as steve7150 said. But now it's over, and maybe just maybe God can use this natural disaster to bring many people to Christ who otherwise would never have done so. In this case, from an eternal perspective, perhaps it was indeed a "blessing in disguise."

Pat could have used different words to express the same idea, but I dont think he was being malicious nor do I think he was just being stupid (but i think he has been on other occasions). I think he was just expressing his honest opinion.

TK

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by steve7150 » Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:52 pm

I am not one to propose that God caused the earthquake, as noted in my earlier post. Let's say it wasn't the devil either- just "plate tectonics in a fallen world" as steve7150 said. But now it's over, and maybe just maybe God can use this natural disaster to bring many people to Christ who otherwise would never have done so. In this case, from an eternal perspective, perhaps it was indeed a "blessing in disguise."

Pat could have used different words to express the same idea, but I dont think he was being malicious nor do I think he was just being stupid (but i think he has been on other occasions). I think he was just expressing his honest opinion.







Are there not a fair number of Christians in Haiti and if Christ defeated the devil and they are in Christ , how can the devil have the kind of power to cause an earthquake? The type of power Satan had in Job was before the New Covenant and at least some Haitians are part of the New Covenant. Man was given dominion over this world and through sin it's in a miserable state both spiritually and physically and not the way God could make it therefore i think this is another consequence of this fallen condition.
God said that man has dominion of this world and if God steps in and causes earthquakes , then what exactly does dominion mean? Dominion means "lordship" which was given to man and he messed it up with these unintended consequences until this evil age ends. I know in the OT God sometimes judged nations on occasion but usually it had some connection to Israel which was on a critical journey which overode anything else, i doubt that applies to Haiti.
I agree that God will make all things work for the good to those who love him as TK suggested. As far as Pat goes, i think he is an easy target and as Chris said , he is definitely not as wise as a serpent.

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by steve » Fri Jan 22, 2010 8:45 pm

To suggest that modern Haiti (if that is not an oxymoron!) suffers disaster, disease, poverty and death because their ancestors made a pact with the devil seems to me to be the same, in principle, with the idea that mankind has suffered all these same things for 6000 years because of our first ancestors' "pact" with the devil. I will not affirm that the former is true, but it does not seem any more objectionable as a suggestion than does the latter statement, which most Christians believe to be the case. If I tell a community that one reason a storm destroyed their community is that Adam and Eve sinned 6000 years ago, would this be thought to be an insensitive or unkind remark?

Again, I have not heard anyone here (nor Pat Robertson either) suggesting that the earthquake was a judgment from God. If the secular media inferred this, I don't know how Pat can be held responsible for their abysmal ignorance of his worldview.

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by steve7150 » Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:07 pm

To suggest that modern Haiti (if that is not an oxymoron!) suffers disaster, disease, poverty and death because their ancestors made a pact with the devil seems to me to be the same, in principle, with the idea that mankind has suffered all these same things for 6000 years because of our first ancestors' "pact" with the devil





Adam was given headship of the human race by God but who was this person who is allowed headship over all Haitians to make a biblically legal deal with Satan?
This Haitian headship is not biblical at least to my knowledge so it sounds like a guess of some kind by Pat unless he claims he got a word of knowledge and then whether he really did is anyone's guess.

Jill
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:16 pm

Post by Jill » Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:45 pm

.
Last edited by Jill on Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
christopher
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:50 pm

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by christopher » Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:49 pm

Steve wrote:
If I tell a community that one reason a storm destroyed their community is that Adam and Eve sinned 6000 years ago, would this be thought to be an insensitive or unkind remark?
Although it may be true, I honestly don't see what help or comfort that would lend to the community.

TK wrote:
The only problem, however, is when then should a Christian speak what sometimes is a hard truth?
All I'm saying is that I believe that truth and opinion must be mingled with discernment and timeliness (see 1Cor 13), especially in very public leaders. Everyone must ask himself of the relevance and value of what he is about to speak before he speaks it IMO. That is especially true in emotionally charged crises like this one.

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: What are we to make of the Haiti earthquake?

Post by steve » Sat Jan 23, 2010 2:25 pm

Steve wrote:
If I tell a community that one reason a storm destroyed their community is that Adam and Eve sinned 6000 years ago, would this be thought to be an insensitive or unkind remark?

Although it may be true, I honestly don't see what help or comfort that would lend to the community.
Of course, I have never said such things in such circumstances, for this very reason. I have never seen this as a necessary clarification to make in any disaster. However, the statement is little more than the presentation of a Christian worldview, which, in some imaginable situations, might come up if someone asked why there are such things in this world. It would never, of course, be the whole answer.

If it were true that Haiti is experiencing exceptional griefs because of a special arrangement made with Satan (I do not even know if such special arrangements can be made with him), it might help for Christians to know this. It could prove necessary to give them awareness of such things if it were needed to inform what kind of warfare would be called for in breaking that curse. I know very little about such matters, since there is little or nothing about them in scripture. However, YWAM and certain other charismatic groups see such information as very relevant in their forming of strategies of outreach. It was within the context of YWAM's Haiti ministries that I first heard rumors of this "pact with Satan" many years ago. I admit that the information would not do much to help me to know how to reach Haiti, but I can imagine the Holy Spirit giving such information to people whom He was calling to go there.

Perhaps Pat Robertson intended to alert the body of Christ to something that he felt would inform their prayers and their warfare. That would be my assumption. It is a shame that the Christian media are, by nature, so public—and perhaps the wisdom of having such media should be re-thought. When does it become "casting pearls before swine"?

If it is at all legitimate to have TV or radio broadcasts directed specially to the body of Christ, it seems inevitable that there will be discussions on such broadcasts about such things as creationism, the devil and demons, miraculous answers to prayer, the special roles of men and women, the immorality of extramarital and homosexual sex, the efficacy of Christ's blood atonement, and many other such issues which will make sense among the Christians to whom the statements are directed, but which will seem like rank superstition and lunacy to unbelievers.

For example, there is a hostile atheist man who has listened to The Narrow Path for over a decade, who regularly sends me hate mail. He is truly convinced that I (like certain members of his family) am "schizophrenic." Why? Because I believe there is a God. He has repeatedly offered me $5,000, if I would be evaluated by a psychiatrist. This is just because I am not an atheist. Where are we to draw the line in expressing our worldview in a public forum, in which unbelieving eavesdroppers will increasingly find our views out-of-step and "nutty" ? I guess I have a hard time accusing Pat Robertson of not knowing where that line is, when I myself don't know where it is.

Post Reply

Return to “General Questions”