Pat Robertson's comments

Pat's just trying to protect his investment he does want any bombs landing on his material things, maybe he plans on taking them with him. Just kidding! I really don't know what to think about his comments, Thank God it's a good thing he is not the President. :-?

2Tim. 3:1 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 6 For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Luke 6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.In ChristJeff

but I dont believe it is the church's place to advocate assassinating someone.What makes us think that CBN has anything to do with church? ;-)

For what it is worth, what in the world does Pat Robertson really know about politics and wars? I think sometimes when I see him on Fox News and the like, he has some decent insights... but so does about anybody else at a Coffee Shop. Also, how do we know knocking out another head will not cause the rise of another more awful one... or perhaps create several more leaders who are able to better motivate others to the same wicked ends? Do we assasinate people simply because it is cheaper to do so? Of course, if they counterstrike, perhaps their strike will be more devistating than what ours was? Maybe Bin Laden has a plan already devised should he be taken out of the picture that somebody is probably ready to fulfill. 'Tiz all crazy.

Thank God it's a good thing he is not the President.Well, he obviously thought one day God thought it would be a good idea for him to be such.

God imparted great wisdom to King Solomon and he declared that you are the essence of the contents that are within your heart. It is a matter of fact that whatever is in your heart, whether good or bad, will eventually come to the surface and be revealed by the words that you speak. Jesus confirmed this in Luke 6:45 when He said, "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth that which is good, and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil, for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Not only will the thoughts of your heart be revealed with words, but those words will create an atmosphere around you. It is a circle of events. Your heart thinks, your mouth speaks, and then your life becomes what you have spoken. It is not a mind over matter thing. It is a principle of God's word, for His word says that there is life and death in the power of the tongue (Proverbs 18:21). So be careful what you think and be cautious of your words, for that is what you will become. James said that our tongue is like the rudder of a ship that controls and steers the vessel. Consider your course of direction. Where are your words taking you; towards the hazardous rocky shores or to the smooth deep waters?

KrispyKrittr wrote:I think I hear a song... ah yes... can you all hear it? Listen...Just a thought.Doesn't Scripture teach that if one is a true believer, God restores the mind and renews daily those who are His?The song He gives us overcomes the songs of this world.In ChristJeff

Right on!...........Pat is full of ......Himself.

How can people be followers of such a man?It's a good thing we're not following a man.

So, everybody thinks Pats statement was wrong. Much of the world's oil is very close to being in control of radicals who hate the West. What does everyone think is the answer to the fact that the West is getting very close to bending their knees to the radical terrorists of the world?In Christ,GaryE

So, everybody thinks Pats statement was wrong. Much of the world's oil is very close to being in control of radicals who hate the West. What does everyone think is the answer to the fact that the West is getting very close to bending their knees to the radical terrorists of the world?So, we should kill another head of state just because they might not play very fairly when it comes to oil?

I can't believe Robertson is trying to politic (lie) his way out of this. Here is a quote of what Robertson says...Robertson told viewers of his longtime show, "The 700 Club," on Monday that Chavez was turning his oil-rich South American country into "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent." (Full story)"If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it," said Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition (CNN)http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/index.html

On a personal note, I used to highly consider going to Regent University to work on a Ph.D in Renewal (Charismatic/Pentecostal) Studies after I complete my Masters. Now I think I'm highly considering otherwise. (Btw, Regent is the university Robertson heads up.) I think I'd rather go to liberal Harvard University.

My question is, What does everyone think the governments of the West should do about this problem? Do you really think that we should just pretend it isn't so?In Christ,GaryE

We are very close to having a severe problem overnight. The idea of lowering our energy rate in some way will not work until it has happened and any way you look at it this will take a long time. The only answer is to have a secure energy supply that can't be disrupted by terrorists or dictators in some oil rich country.In Christ,GaryE

I don't know for a fact but I would bet the biggest oil field on earth is under israel.

Robertson apologizes for assassination remarkAssociated PressVIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson apologized today for calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, only hours after he denied saying Chavez should be killed."Is it right to call for assassination?" Robertson said. "No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."Chavez, whose country is the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, has emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of President Bush. He accuses the United States of conspiring to topple his government and possibly backing plots to assassinate him. U.S. officials have called the accusations ridiculous.On Monday's telecast of his Christian Broadcasting Network show "The 700 Club," Robertson had said: "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."He continued: "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."Today, he initially denied having called for Chavez to be killed and said The Associated Press had misinterpreted his remarks."I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out,'" Robertson said on his show. "'Take him out' could be a number of things including kidnapping."He later issued the apology on his Web site.When the AP had called Robertson on Tuesday for elaboration, spokeswoman Angell Watts said Robertson would not do interviews and had no statement about his remarks. He also declined several interview requests today.On Tuesday, the State Department called Robertson's remarks "inappropriate."

Yes. Less politics, more preaching.

There is a problem with mixing religion and politics. If you write a letter to a newspaper about abortion you are writing something that is a religious and also a political opinion. If you are writing about the right to bear arms in the US you are writing something that is just a political opinion. It seems wise for the people who are on this site to stay with religious opinions and not carry over into political opinions.Pat Robertson along with many other Christian leaders in the media are both religious and political leaders. When he made the statement that included the word assassination, he was making a political statement. Pat made a statement that he should not have said but to be fair with Pat, I have to say that in the few months I've read these posts I've read many notes that should not have been written. Probably most people who would now ridicule Pat have written or said something they regret.When I was a child, I saw a cartoon that was trying to teach how to overthrow a country. The cartoon said, "you need to undermine the leaders of a country to overthrow that country". Politics work the same way. Political groups seem to try to get elected in the US by doing this. By telling a lie over and over many people believe the lie then those that believe the lie go and tell the lie too.Religion also works the same way. Is it wise for me to dissemble a religious leader with my lips or someone else writing a post just because they say or write something that I disagree with or is different than my theology? Isn't it just pride that would cause me to do this instead of a heart to advance the Kingdom of God. There is a difference between saying an opinion and trying to cut someone down with our lips. Slander and tale bearing are sins. {tale bearers and a gossipers are often telling the truth} How come no one suggested prayer for Pat? Who out there has recently prayed for GW?In Christ,GaryE

Last year I read a speech of President Hugo Chavez, he professes to have a personal relationship with Christ. Pat Roberson, a profess Christian calling for the assassination of another Christian. Wickedness has indeed abound that the love of many has become wax cold. Come Lord Jesus come!www.paula4jc.com

Hi paula4jc...!"Last year I read a speech of President Hugo Chavez, he professes to have a personal relationship with Christ. Pat Roberson, a profess Christian calling for the assassination of another Christian."As we all probably know, not everyone that claims to be a Christian truly knows Christ. The historical record of Hugo Chavez shows quite clearly that, while he may "talk the talk", he definitely does not "walk the walk" of being a true Christian. In fact, after having studied him intensely during a Latin American Politics graduate course last year, I am almost convinced that Chavez is mentally unstable. He has quite a few "issues" (including connections with the Columbian drug trade, supporters of an athiestic communist/dictatorship, and international terrorism) that are creating many problems in the region, his relationship with the United States, and notable intolerance for Christianity. Now, I do not agree with Pat Robertson's comments concerning assassignation. Robertson's justification for an assassignation in order to "save lives and money" sounds alot like terrorists who bomb abortion clinics in order to prevent abortion. Of course, abortion is a disgusting act of sinful desperation. But murder is not an option. Both are sin.I urge everyone to pray for believers in Venezuela (and other latin american countries). The persecution for authentic Christians is quite intense and seldom reported. :-)

"It's one thing to have a [biblically inspired] position on one or two issues," said Greene, 26, who was wearing a wristband printed with the slogan "Jesus Is My Homie." "This class has you look deeper. It gives you an intellectual consistency."That is hilarious! :-? consistency?

RESPOND TO EDITOR E-MAIL STORY PRINTER FRIENDLY FOXFAN CENTRAL Raw Data: Statement by Pat Robertson Wednesday, August 24, 2005 \tSTORIES•Robertson Apologizes for Chavez RemarkThe following is a statement released on Wednesday by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson in the wake of his controversial statements made on Monday regarding Venzuelan president Hugo Chavez: VIRGINIA BEACH, Va., August 24, 2005--I want to take this opportunity to clarify remarks made on the Monday, August 22nd edition of The 700 Club where I adlibbed a comment following a very brilliant analysis by Dale Hurd of the danger that the United States faces from the out-of-control dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. In this story, Col. Chavez repeatedly claimed that Americans were "trying to assassinate him."In my frustration that the U.S. and the world community are ignoring this threat, I said the following:Thanks, Dale. If you look back just a few years, there was a popular coup that overthrew him; and what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing; and as a result, within about 48 hours, that coup was broken, Chavez was back in power. But we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent. I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger, and this is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, and we have other doctrines that we have announced, and without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another 200-billion-dollar war to get rid of one strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him.Col. Chavez has found common cause with terrorists such as the noted assassin Carlos the Jackal, has visited Iran reportedly to gain access to nuclear technology, and has referred to Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro as his comrades. Col. Chavez also intends to fund the violent overthrow of democratically elected governments throughout South America, beginning with neighboring Colombia.As I report the news daily from around the world, I am acutely conscious of the fact that our nation is at war. Not only are there active wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but there is a war of terror being waged against civilized nations throughout the world.We are in the midst of a war that is draining vast amounts of our treasure and is costing the blood of our armed forces. I am a person who believes in peace, but not peace at any price. However, I said before the war in Iraq began that the wisest course would be to wage war against Saddam Hussein, not the whole nation of Iraq. When faced with the threat of a comparable dictator in our own hemisphere, would it not be wiser to wage war against one person rather than finding ourselves down the road locked in a bitter struggle with a whole nation?The brilliant Protestant theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who lived under the hellish conditions of Nazi Germany, is reported to have said:"If I see a madman driving a car into a group of innocent bystanders, then I can't, as a Christian, simply wait for the catastrophe and then comfort the wounded and bury the dead. I must try to wrestle the steering wheel out of the hands of the driver."On the strength of this reasoning, Bonhoeffer decided to lend his support to those in Germany who had joined together in an attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Bonnhoffer was imprisoned and killed by the Nazis, but his example deserves our respect and consideration today.There are many who disagree with my comments, and I respect their opinions. There are others who think that stopping a dictator is the appropriate course of action. In any event, the incredible publicity surrounding my remarks has focused our government's attention on a growing problem which has been largely ignored.…………………………………………………………………………………………….This was on Fox news on Sunday Evening.Early in my Christian walk, I had to sort out a lot of my thinking. One of the things that needed sorted out was whether it was wrong to fight in a war or even whether it was wrong for a police officer to shoot someone as a Christian officer doing his duty. Eventually I came to believe that it is ok to be in a war and it is ok to shoot a criminal if he is a threat that can't be stopped any other way.What led me to conclude this was a story of a woman being beaten outside of an apartment while many people inside heard her screams and did nothing. My conclusion is that as a Christian you can't just stand by and let evil take over. Apparently, this is what Mr. Bonnhoffer was saying and it is very similar to what John Knox was saying. It is also what the founding fathers were saying when they risked there lives to revolt against King George.In Christ,GaryE

One of the things that needed sorted out was whether it was wrong to fight in a war or even whether it was wrong for a police officer to shoot someone as a Christian officer doing his duty. Eventually I came to believe that it is ok to be in a war and it is ok to shoot a criminal if he is a threat that can't be stopped any other way.I believe that the police and the courts have the authority and clear conscience to use force to keep civil order. Paul did not seem to apologize when he said..."Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God's servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer."So the right of the governement to execute wrath upon it's citizens who do wrong is fairly established here. The question that is not explicity answered in this particular scripture: does God give one governement the right to execute wrath upon another government? MC

Brother Gary wrote: It is also what the founding fathers were saying when they risked there lives to revolt against King George.Wasn't King George and the nation of England a Christian nation?In ChristJeff

Brother Mike wrote:The question that is not explicity answered in this particular scripture: does God give one governement the right to execute wrath upon another government? James 1:19 So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; 20 for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God. Many times the nation that is used by God to destroy another, according to His judgement, believes that they are righteous. Yet what does Scripture say? In ChristJeff

It's my understanding that John Knox was the first of the leaders of the reformation to take a stand that it is the right of the people to resist an evil government. This had to be the thought of the founding fathers of our country. It was apparently thought by the founding fathers that King George was an evil tyrant.In John Knoxe's time, there had been a church state government run by the Roman Catholic Church. The Inquisition had been in full swing and many reformers had been murdered. For a season there was a Protestant in control of Scotland then when that person was gone there was another Roman Catholic set up as queen. John faced her down and was willing to kill her if it had to be, taking the position that it is the right of a Christian to resist evil. This is my limited understanding of that situation and this is also the position that I personally believe is right.While I don't think we should be building and empire, I don't think we should allow an evil people to build one either.In Christ,GaryE

People like John Knox and King James who was responsible for commissioning the King James Bible lived in the 1500's.John and Charles Wesley, and George Whitefield (sp?) came to America as missionaries during the 1700's. What did the Founding Fathers consider evil that waranted revolt against the government they were subjected to? In ChristJeff

In terms of Hugo Chavez, he was elected by large majority twice in democratically. In a recent recall election, former President Jimmy Carter monitored the recall and he verfied that the recall vote was properly carried out. So it is the will of the people that Chavez remains president of Venezuela. Here is a list of some of the things he has done for his nation's people,Mission Robinson—teaching more than 1.3 million people to read and write in the space of 16 months, a world record in this field Mission Ribas—secondary education for just over 1 million people so far, who were denied this basic human right during the 4th Republic Mission Barrio Adentro Into the Neighborhood—to provide free primary health care for more than 10 million people up to now, and who did not have access to health care in the past – unless they paid for it Mission Simoncito—care and education for pregnant mothers and their children from gestation to kindergarten, to ensure a healthy start to life Bolivarian Schools—integral schooling including free health care and meals, with the objective of inculcating patriotic, humanitarian values in the upcoming generations. On the other hand his government controls the oil industry that the US buy 59% of the Venezuelan oil. The US has a history of overthrowing democratically elected leaders when they seek to maintain control of their own resources, and reject foreign encroachment on what God has given them, In ChristJeff

The early settlers of the colonies had charters to establish their own governments in the colonies. After enduring the hardships and dangers of establishing this land, the English government came here and took these agreements away. {This is much like being a trucebreaker and a thief.} The English government made the effort to tax the people without giving them a voice about this and the colonies were also forced to trade with England only. King George took the position that it was the chief duty of the colonists to submit to him..................................................2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 2Ti 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 2Ti 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. .................................................Notice in verse 3 it says trucebreakers. It seems to me that this is some of what the English government was doing with the charters. Also, notice verse 4 where it says traitors. It seems to me that this is what some our doing right now as a war is going on by not supporting our efforts to root out an evil group of people that want to force their way on the people of Iraq. Someone said, "war is sin". From my position being a traitor is sin.You mentioned the Methodist John Wesley. It's my understanding that he did not believe the colonies should revolt. Over on this side of the waters, Francis Asbury did.In Christ,GaryE

No doubt that if the Communists would get control of this countries wealth they would be able to do a lot of humanitarian programs with the wealth that is here. Do you really want the extreme left to have control here as is going on in Venezuela? It seems to me that the votes have been bought.In Christ,GaryE

Brother Gary wrote: The English government made the effort to tax the people without giving them a voice about this and the colonies were also forced to trade with England only. King George took the position that it was the chief duty of the colonists to submit to him.This is the pursuit of all nations. Back then this form of economy was called Colonialism. Before Colonialism, one was subject to the rule of Feudal Lords. Before that, one was subjected to those who had the power to pillage. Today we have evolved into just another form of economy which is still based on the precepts founded on the depravity of man. James 5:1 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you! 2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days. 4 Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. 5 You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does not resist you. This Scripture speaks to the last days. What signs of evil do we see in these days?In ChristJeff

Brother Gary wrote: It seems to me that the votes have been bought.I believe it was Plato who first envisioned the concept "democracy." He wrote back then a warning. He basically stated that if the nation was ruled by the majority, the majority would strip the minority of their wealth. This is a result again based on the depravity of man. People like Jefferson and Madison understood this principle quite clearly. Back then only white men who owned land could vote,Dan. 2:36 “This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king. 37 You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory; 38 and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all—you are this head of gold. 39 But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. 40 And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others. 41 Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. 45 Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold—the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure.” With each government the quality diminishes according to Scripture. I believe this Scripture speaks to the quality of "democracy." 41 Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. After this form of government has passed, Jesus will establish His kingdom for a 1000 years.In ChristJeff

BBC Venezuela seeks action in US row Hugo Chavez is an outspoken critic of the USVenezuela's president says his government will take legal action against a US TV evangelist who called for US agents to kill him. Hugo Chavez said Venezuela might even seek to extradite Pat Robertson. He also warned he would complain to the UN if the US failed to take action. Mr Robertson has apologised for his comments, which came amid already tense US-Venezuela relations. On Sunday, US civil rights leader Jesse Jackson lent support to Mr Chavez. On a visit to Venezuela, Mr Jackson denounced Mr Robertson's assassination call as immoral and illegal. He called on the US Justice Department to investigate the matter. The US State Department has called Mr Robertson's comments "inappropriate". Extradition "I announce that my government is going to take legal action in the United States... to call for the assassination of a head of state is an act of terrorism," Mr Chavez said in a televised speech. "If the US government does not take action that it must take, we will go to the United Nations and the Organization of American States to denounce the US government," Mr Chavez said. Mr Chavez, who has frequently charged that the US are plotting to kill him, said Mr Robertson was "crazy" and "a public menace". On Sunday, Rev Jackson said the US and Venezuela should work out their differences through diplomacy. Diplomatic tension Mr Robertson's comments came amid tense relations between Caracas and Washington. President Chavez is a regular critic of Washington, which regards the left-wing leader as a possible source of instability in the region. The Venezuelan leader has said that US President George W Bush will be to blame if he is attacked. A week ago, Pat Robertson told viewers of his influential TV show, the 700 Club, that the US should act on Mr Chavez's recurrent complaints that the US was allegedly trying to assassinate him. The two nations have recently broken off co-operation on combating illegal drugs, though America still buys Venezuelan oil. The nation is the world's fifth-largest producer. I wonder what would happen to some one with a similar public notoriety as Pat Robertson, if they called for President Bushes assasination? In ChristJeff

I don't know for a fact but I would bet the biggest oil field on earth is under israel.Have you not heard the Israeli joke that 'we wandered for forty years and settled in the only place in the Middle East which has no oil; now that's what I call guidance!'

Wasn't King George and the nation of England a Christian nation?England has never been and can never be a Christian nation, and King George was German. I don't know whether or not King George was a Christian. What makes you think he was?

After this form of government has passed, Jesus will establish His kingdom for a 1000 years. This is an important point, Jeff. Democracy is a very modern concept in its current outworking. I am very concerned at the Western world's determination of imposing democracy on the rest of the world. Many years ago I talked with some church leaders who were re-examining their own church history in which a powerful leader, George Jeffreys, had led a break-away from the denomination he had founded! One old man commented sadly; "I saw, in the end, that Jeffreys wanted us to be free to do what he wanted". Is this the motive of the 'democrats' too?

Brother Ron wrote:England has never been and can never be a Christian nation, and King George was German. I don't know whether or not King George was a Christian. What makes you think he was?I guess I was remembering what I was taught in highschool about the kings of Europe. After the teachings of Calvin took hold back in the late 1500's, the kings of Europe adopted the philosophy of "Divine Rule." I guess I was loose with the term Christian, There are those who are Christians and there are those who take on the outward appearance of being a christain, I also see your point in saying that England was never and will never be a Christain nation, And I will declare the same truth pretaining to the USA.Nationalism is a wine that causes many to stumble, Thankyou Brother RonIn ChristJeff

Brother Ron wrote:"I saw, in the end, that Jeffreys wanted us to be free to do what he wanted". Is this the motive of the 'democrats' too?There is a huge war taking place in central Asia. The stakes are high. The USA, Russia, and China are waging a covert war against each other for future dominance in this region of the world, The strategies of fallen men are seeking to cement prosperity found in the treasures that are of this world, Job 15:31 \tLet him not trust in futile things, deceiving himself,\tFor futility will be his reward. Job 15:35 \tThey conceive trouble and bring forth futility;\tTheir womb prepares deceit.” Psa. 78:33 \tTherefore their days He consumed in futility,\tAnd their years in fear. There are many fearful people in this world.In ChristJeff

I guess I was remembering what I was taught in highschool about the kings of Europe. After the teachings of Calvin took hold back in the late 1500's, the kings of Europe adopted the philosophy of "Divine Rule." The history of this nation is confusing even for folk who have tried to study it and lived here. Earlier kings ruled by Papal consent in that he was their 'vicar' and had the power of excommunication with its consequence in this life and the next.Henry VIII was essentially a Catholic with himself as Pope. He took the right to choose the bishops. A right which is still nominally held by the British Government. Nominations may come from the Anglican counsels but finally it is in the 'gift' of the monarch's prime minister. (I think that is how it works) Of course, this being England nothing is quite what it seems and the prime minister really just does as he is counselled.The blood letting in England was worst in the reigns of Henry's children Edward (the protestant) and Mary (Bloody Mary, the Catholic). Elizabeth was the resulting compromise. She favoured a 'reformed theology' with a 'catholic liturgy'. On her death James (James the VIth of Scotland became king.) He was stongly episcopal because he had seen that the 'kirk' in Scotland was controlled by its own elders and not by royally appointed bishops. James was determined to have an episcopal Anglical church in which he could pressure the bishops to do as he wished. The presbyterians insisted that the king must do as the church told him; the royalists believed that the church should do as the king told it. This was the seeds for our Civil War in 1642.James did believe in the divine rights of kings but this was a hangover from early times rather than a product of the reformation or reformed teaching. Finally the struggle for ultimate power became intense and Charles 1st, the son of James raised his banners in Nottingham in 1642 and declared war on his own parliament. Subsequent kings were trimmed back with almost each succeeding parliament until the present time in which we have a constitutional monarchy where the monarch is permitted to reign but not to rule. That's a great British compromise for you.During James 1st reign a group of protestants who were somewhat on the left-wing of the reformation decided they had had enough of church and priestcraft and, via Holland, took passage on a boat called the Mayflower...I think you know the story from there... :-D