home
RSS
Does Phil Robertson get the Bible wrong?
Phil Robertson of A&E's "Duck Dynasty" has been suspended for his comments on homosexuality.
December 20th, 2013
11:23 AM ET

Does Phil Robertson get the Bible wrong?

By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN) - The Robertson family of "Duck Dynasty" fame has rallied around its patriarch, saying his controversial comments on homosexuality are "grounded in the teachings of the Bible." But Scripture is fiercely contested ground, and some experts say Phil Robertson misinterprets a key Bible verse.

A&E, the network that broadcasts the hugely popular "Duck Dynasty" show, suspended Robertson for a now infamous interview with GQ magazine. In the article, Robertson, who became a born-again Christian in the 1970s after a prodigal youth, is asked to define "sin."

Here's what Robertson says: “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men."

Robertson, 67, then paraphrases a Bible passage from the New Testament: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers - they won’t inherit the kingdom of God.”

That's a pretty close citation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, which is a letter from Paul, often called the father of Christianity theology, to a fledgling Christian community in Corinth, Greece.

Here's what Paul's passage says, as rendered in the New International Version, by far the most popular translation among evangelicals and conservative Christians such as Robertson:

"Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Evangelicals, who make up about a quarter of the U.S. population, tend to take that passage at face value. The Robertson family pastor, for instance, told CNN on Thursday that "the verse explains itself."

Robertson himself is no religious neophyte. He's an elder in the White's Ferry Road Church of Christ and offers spiritual counseling, charity and Bible studies to many in his hometown of West Monroe, Louisiana, the family pastor, Mike Kellett told CNN.

The "Duck Dynasty" star also preaches around the country to conservatives that flock to hear his blend of woodsy, plainspoken Christianity.

Many conservatives backed Robertson's views on Scripture and homosexuality this week, if not the "crude" way he argued his point to GQ.

My Take: The Bible really does condemn homosexuality

But other Bible experts said the Scripture Robertson cited isn't quite clear about homosexuality.

"A lot of people misread this text because it's so complicated," said O. Wesley Allen Jr., an associate professor at Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky.

First, scholars say, we have to look at the context surrounding Paul's letter.

The Christian leader is trying to get the quarreling Corinthians to stop taking each other to civil courts and being judgmental. "The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already," Paul says.

Things were supposed to be different after they became Christian believers, Paul continues; they were supposed to stop their sinful ways.

Then Paul lists some of their sins of the past, including greed, drinking too much, worshipping idols and sexual immorality. "That is what some of you were," Paul says. "But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

The list of sins is likely based on rumors that Paul heard about Corinth, says Warren Throckmorton, a psychology professor at Grove City College in Pennsylvania who has studied the Bible's teachings on homosexuality. Bible scholars call it a "vice list," and it appears several times in Scripture.

So what does Paul's "vice list" say about homosexuality? That's the tricky part.

The first word Paul uses is "malakoi," which means "soft" in Greek, according to Allen. By analogy, the word came to mean "effeminate," which is how the King James Version of the Bible translates it.

"In the ancient world, it would refer to a boy in a relationship with an older man," Allen said. "It was pederasty, not homosexuality as we think of it today."

The other relevant word on Paul's "vice list" is "arsenokotai," which means "male sex." It refers to the other half in the man-boy relationship, common in Greece at the time, Allen said, the older male having sex with the "soft one."

"It isn't anything to do with what we would see today in an intimate, mutual relationship between gay adults," said Allen, who is co-authoring an upcoming book on homosexuality and heterosexuality in the church.

My Take: The Bible’s surprisingly mixed messages on sexuality

Even so, scholars such as Allen acknowledge there are no Bible passages that support same-sex relationships, and at least seven that appear to condemn gay sex.

"There's no way around the fact that those passages take a negative view of homosexuality, and nowhere in the Bible is a positive view offered," Allen said. "So conservatives and liberals continue to debate."

Liberals say that some parts of the Bible offered particular truths for a specific times and places but those times and places, as well as human understanding of sexuality, have progressed dramatically.

"The Bible may be divinely inspired, but its authors were human and saw, as St. Paul puts it, through a glass darkly," said Jim Naughton, a Christian gay rights activist and communications consultant. "On the subject of homosexuality, the Bible doesn’t mean what Phil Robertson thinks it means."

Conservatives such as Robertson, on the other hand, argue that the Bible is the bedrock of their faith, unchanging and unalterable. "We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word," the Robertson family said Thursday.

For decades, the gulf between the two sides has divided denominations, churches and families. To paraphrase Lincoln, both sides read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and both invoke his aid to argue against each other. Which is why our contemporary debate over homosexuality is so fierce, and so seemingly unending.

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Belief • Bible • Christianity • Church • Culture wars • Discrimination • Ethics • evangelicals • Faith • Gay marriage • Gay rights • gender issues • Prejudice • Same-sex marriage • Sexuality

soundoff (5,719 Responses)
  1. ronkand

    Phil is right. There's something... awkward?... about a man placing his member inside the opening of another man's large intestine meant for disposal of waste. The birth canal was made for making and delivering babies. What god joins together humankind should not join. What God – or human nature for that matter – made to be apart humankind should not join together. Who can possibly argue with this?

    December 21, 2013 at 4:24 pm |
    • Answer

      You've never seen a vagina then. Why don't educate yourself about where the urine comes out of a women!

      December 21, 2013 at 4:45 pm |
    • Answer

      Dumbass religious freaks don't even want to know how much bacteria exchange there is to a normal kiss.

      You rejects are a laughing stock.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:48 pm |
      • Reality # 2

        http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/20/yes-o-ral-s-ex-is-s-ex-and-it-can-boost-cancer-risk/?npt=NP1

        "Yes, o-ral s-ex is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-

        Here's a crucial message for teens: Oral s-ex carries many of the same risks as v-aginal s-ex, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of o-ral cancers in America in people under age 50.

        "Adolescents don’t think o-ral se-x is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 's-ex.'"

        (note- hyphens added to defeat the "secret" word/fragment filter.
        Tis called the Bill Clinton Syndrome !!

        December 21, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
    • Maddy

      Heteros engage in anal, also.
      Infertile couples have sex.
      Your point...and Phil's...are nonsense.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:56 pm |
      • Reality # 2

        "A-nal s-ex has always been a highly controversial subject, and the controversy that surrounds it looks set to continue into 2014 because evidence is acc-umulating that this practice may sometimes lead to a-nal cancer.

        Indeed, the American Cancer Society now says that 'most a-nal cancers seem to be linked to infection with HPV'.

        This is human papilloma virus, which is readily spread from one person to another during s-exual contact.

        The Society also states that 'having a-nal s-ex is a risk factor for a-nal cancer in both men and women'. The risk is greatest if you have had numerous partners.

        Read more: http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/s-exandrelationships/a-nals-ex.htm#ixzz2o9Mw9Izr

        Note: hyphens added to defeat the "secret" word/fragment filter.

        December 21, 2013 at 5:16 pm |
        • Maddy

          So don't engage in it.

          It doesn't negate my point that heteros engage in it, missionary man.

          December 21, 2013 at 5:21 pm |
        • Reality # 2

          Another reason not to practice unsafe se-x:

          from the CDC-2006

          "Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

          December 21, 2013 at 11:32 pm |
  2. Oh Brother ^

    Where are all the pro-drunk, pro-beastiality, pro-swindler, and pro-fornication groups on this one ? Why aren't they in an uproar too ?

    December 21, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
  3. Lana

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ&w=640&h=360]

    December 21, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
    • tallulah13

      [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5rRZdiu1UE&w=640&h=360]

      December 23, 2013 at 12:14 am |
  4. Jim O

    Leviticus 18:22 is pretty clear about the topic.

    December 21, 2013 at 3:35 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Leviticus is pretty clear about tattoos as well, I don't hear christians chastising people for those, even in their own ranks.

      Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
      Leviticus 19:28

      December 21, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
    • Maddy

      Sigh.

      Leviticus was written for Levite priests.
      It was never meant to be used for the public.

      Stop using it as your basis for bigotry.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:08 pm |
    • Tracy

      Leviticus is also equally clear about prohibiting the eating of pork and wearing blended fabrics. No more cotton-poly blend Duck Dynasty tee-shirts (which is what the family makes and sells for a profit.)

      December 21, 2013 at 4:14 pm |
    • UncleBenny

      Leviticus is clear on a lot of things. It's a good thing we don't pay much attention to it nowadays. For starters:

      20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

      25:44-45 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.

      11:10-11 10 But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean. And since you are to regard them as unclean, you must not eat their meat; you must regard their carcasses as unclean.

      19:27 27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:14 pm |
  5. Kenny

    Regardless of you beliefs, as soon as someone cites the bible in defense of their conduct, I know immediately they have no rational defense. Why? Because the bible has been used to justify many atrocities. Take a plank of hatred, paint it with a coat of religion, and eventually you can build a fence. If something or someone brings out your fear or your hatred, you can find something in the bible to cloak it. Better to own up and say I hate that person, or I fear that person, at least it is honest.

    December 21, 2013 at 3:27 pm |
  6. lol??

    tony sayz,
    "So Christians shouldn't follow the old testament's 10 commandments?"
    They graduated from that school and are free.

    December 21, 2013 at 3:02 pm |
    • Tad

      Really? You don't follow the 10 Commandments? Good to know. Shut your mouth about gays, then., bigot.

      December 21, 2013 at 3:14 pm |
  7. tony

    The greatest gods have the biggest collection plates. And presumably need them the least . . .

    December 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
  8. Leonid Brezhnev

    There is no god, no after life. The bible is just a collection of fairy tales that were told to make the sheeple good little sheeple.

    December 21, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
    • NO BIG DEAL

      As the old farmer from Nebraska said ( keep your mouth shut as you don't know whats going to fly in or out of it and mind your own business) !!!

      December 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • Chris

      How can a man know everything in the Bible or be so sure that every written word in it is true? Afterall, many aspects within the Bible can be interpreted in many ways by those reading it. Everybody takes away their own concepts and ideas from it and forms their own opinions.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
  9. Realist

    --------------
    ...................................................

    Christianity is built upon a LIE ...

    ................ because ....................

    ..... http://www.GodIsImaginary.com ...

    ... and thank goodness because he ...

    ............. emanates from the .............

    ...................... http://www.EvilBible.com

    -----------------
    .............................................................

    December 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • Dainks

      The fool says in his heart, "There is no god."

      December 21, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
      • sybaris

        So you are saying you are a fool because you don't believe in Zeus or Ra or Quezacoatl.

        Bravo!!

        December 21, 2013 at 3:21 pm |
      • HotAirAce

        So what? Most atheists say something like "I don't believe there are any gods but I don't know everything so maybe there are, but there's no evidence for any god that cares about what goes on on Earth so no reason to live like there is."

        December 21, 2013 at 3:37 pm |
      • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

        Cults often call people outside of their belief systems "fools" or some other nonsense. I don't know why you would find that compelling.

        December 21, 2013 at 3:54 pm |
  10. Richard Aberdeen

    Perhaps conservative evangelicals and other Christians should pay a little closer to where Paul lists "the greedy" and, stop supporting the American capitalist war-mongering way, which represents the opposite of everything Jesus ever said or did, who can say for sure?

    December 21, 2013 at 2:00 pm |
    • Page Turner

      Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. With the rise of capitalism, it became possible to amass great wealth by serving and pleasing your fellow man.Capitalists seek to discover what people want and produce and market it as efficiently as possible as a means to profit. A couple of examples would be J.D. Rockefeller, whose successful marketing drove kerosene prices down from 58 cents a gallon in 1865 to 7 cents in 1900. Henry Ford became rich by producing cars for the common man. Both Ford's and Rockefeller's personal benefits pale in comparison with that received by the common man by having cheaper kerosene and cheaper transportation. There are literally thousands of examples of how mankind's life has been made better by those in the pursuit of profits. Here's my question to you: Are people who, by their actions, created unprecedented convenience, longer life expectancy and a more pleasant life for the ordinary person — and became wealthy in the process — deserving of all the scorn and ridicule heaped upon them by intellectuals, politicians and you?

      December 21, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
      • tony

        And to make a lot more money, firing older employees just before retirement, and moving the bulk of their jobs to foreign countries with the lowest labor rates and taxes

        December 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
        • lol??

          Democracies are much easier to corrupt with their anything goes and all is fair in LUV and WAR. The republic wasn't gud enough for the pwogwessives

          December 21, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • lol??

      Christians have no representation, so what's yer point?? In a mob rule, democracy rules, majority rules, Crips and Bloods states rule, the salt is not as numerous as the dead meat. How could it be any different?? Quit showing your Christ hating views, which are just a fashionable form of bullying.

      December 21, 2013 at 2:19 pm |
      • MR

        You are joking, right? How many atheists are in Congress right now? Do you even know what representation means?

        December 21, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
      • MR

        And his point is, if you pretend to be a Christian, and I feel you in particular are for the purpose of trolling, live by Christ's tenets. He was against rampant greed. You seen to support it.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
    • sybaris

      Funny that a multi-millionaire on a fake reality show lists greed as a sin.

      December 21, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
      • Oh Brother ^

        Greed has nothing to do with how much money you have. It has to do with the condition of your heart. A poor man can be greedy and a rich man can be generous. It is GENERALLY vice-versa, but you have no idea unless you know what a man does with his money. Want to know what bigottry really is ? You just showed it.

        December 21, 2013 at 4:01 pm |
      • Scott

        Just because someone is wealthy does not automatically mean they are greedy. Wanting what someone else has earned when you have done nothing to earn it yourself is probably pretty greedy though.

        December 22, 2013 at 7:41 am |
    • Mark Reiter

      Phil never suggests that he is not a sinner.

      December 21, 2013 at 5:17 pm |
  11. gahh

    Robertson and the people who agree with him, need to worry about their own souls, and leave judging to God. People have the right to agree, or disagree with somebody, but you do not have the right to judge somebody else, that's God's job. If being Gay is a sin, along with eating pork, and a thousand other things, then let God do the judging, that's what a true Christian does. Judge ye not, that ye shall be judged, for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Robertson may not be guilty of being Gay, but he is guilty of passing judgment, on other people.

    December 21, 2013 at 1:58 pm |
    • Kc

      unfortunately that is not being reported. He did say it wasn't up to him to judge, it was up to God; that he (Phil) loved all others as God does.
      No one wants to talk about that.

      December 21, 2013 at 2:04 pm |
    • lol??

      So you want Christians to put their brains in a box and put em in the closet alongside the shoes designed by the kweirdo fashion designers for the stick ladies that look like they just came out of a concentration camp?? No matter how fashionable death is it ain't gonna work.

      1Cr 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

      December 21, 2013 at 2:09 pm |
      • MR

        Jesus never said a word about gay people, but he said a lot about heteros and their judgemental behavior.
        Worry about your own behavior.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
        • lol??

          Where are the socie debaters to call foul on yer assertion?? They must have an antichrist agenda.

          December 21, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
    • Page Turner

      That is what Phil said – you obviously did not read the article. And for that GLAAD wants to silence and destroy him.

      December 21, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
    • Oh Brother ^

      By claiming that his actions are wrong you are guilty of "judging" by your own standard. Judging has nothing to do with calling out a behavior. Judging is about how we treat others.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
  12. lol??

    lol??
    Jesus claims authorship of the scriptures, MORONS...

    December 21, 2013 at 1:57 pm |
    • MR

      Judgemental much? Your the typical puck and choose Christian.

      Why isn't Jesus's name Immanuel?

      December 21, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Claiming authorship and demonstrating authorship are not the same.

      December 21, 2013 at 3:56 pm |
      • HotAirAce

        Not to mention proving fiction vs. non-fiction. . .

        December 21, 2013 at 3:59 pm |
    • UncleBenny

      No, he doesn't. Jesus never wrote anything down that we know of.

      December 21, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
  13. Marc

    IIf being gay is so awful so corrupt and sinful what did Jesus Christ say about it ?
    NOT ONE WORD.

    December 21, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
    • lol??

      So what do you expect to prove with yer nuthin', moron??

      December 21, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
      • Craig

        He actually said a lot. Oh by the way, two men can not pro create. That should clue you in on his view since he is the creator. MORON.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
        • Tracy

          So anyone who isn't able to procreate (for medical reasons) is a sinner to be judged by god? That doesn't seem like a very loving stance to take – and isn't Jesus supposed to be a loving god?

          December 21, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
    • Rob

      Mak 7:21-22

      December 21, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
      • Rob

        Mark 7:21-22

        December 21, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
        • MR

          Mark 7:21-22 doesn't mention gay people, sorry.

          December 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
  14. Miriam

    In other words, the Liberals are the cancer of society

    December 21, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
    • tony

      Lance Baxter has been fired from his job as the "voice of GEICO" after he called Tea Partiers "retarded" in a voicemail message to the Tea Party group FreedomWorks. Baxter, also known as D.C. Douglas, is the actor who says "GEICO, real service, real savings" in GEICO's ads. After his recorded remarks were posted on biggovernment.com, along with his cellphone number, Douglas accused the Tea Party of launching a campaign against him: "Harass my employer to get me fired is an egregiously disproportionate response to my actions." Did the Tea Party bully GEICO into firing him — or was the company just taking appropriate action? (Below: Listen to a recording of Baxter's angry voicemail message)

      December 21, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
    • Phil

      You got that right. If it weren't for liberals we'd probably still be slave owners.

      December 21, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
      • MP

        Slave owners were democrats FYI

        December 21, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
        • MR

          Ah yes. The Dixiecrats. And after the Civil Rights Act of 64, they went...to the GOP.
          Historically, parties flip flopped all the time. The parties of the 1800's are nothing like the the parties if today, and the parties if today will be different than the parties of the future.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
      • redgranny

        Actually the slaves were freed by a republican president! Lincoln was republican. As for the bible. I don't need someone to tell me how to understand the bible. My heart and faith will guide me.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
    • MR

      In other words, you're intolerant.

      December 21, 2013 at 1:30 pm |
  15. Will

    Salvation and love aren't controversial but sin and discipline are...

    December 21, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
  16. Really?

    did he get the Bible wrong?

    how many people have been killed / murdered by the Christian Church because they "had a different opinion" of what the Bible says......

    December 21, 2013 at 1:01 pm |
    • myuntidydesk

      Great point. I think anyone who preaches hate or acts hateful towards ANY group is not a true Christian... Jesus never would have done that or stood for it.

      December 21, 2013 at 1:07 pm |
      • tony

        Sadly, that's just your opinion. No whre is there a contemporary record of jesus or his speeches.

        December 21, 2013 at 1:08 pm |
      • Kc

        Actually Jesus got very angry and threw the moneychangers out of the temples during the Palm Sunday festivities. He overturned tables and sent them away.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:13 pm |
      • lol??

        You sayin' God doesn't claim to hate?? YOU are a LIAR.

        Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

        December 21, 2013 at 2:49 pm |
    • tony

      That sums it up rather nicely

      December 21, 2013 at 1:07 pm |
    • Jon Samuel

      One can easily pull up the supporting passages in Mathew and elsewhere in the Bible that support everything Phil said. It is all there. No controversy. There are however liberals and gays who don't like what it says.

      Robertson is an elder who has been teaching and preaching for years. Believe him or some CNN hack with an ax to grind?

      December 21, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
      • tony

        Along with how to beat your wife, and stick it to your handmaiden.

        December 21, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
        • theBigE

          Incorrect. That's Old Testament law, not what Christians are bound by nor expected to follow. When people such as yourself "quote" this, it displays your lack of knowledge of the subject.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
        • MR

          Jesus never said word one about gays. If you take anything from the NT, take THAT, and stop using to OT to support bigotry.
          You display your own ignorance, Big E.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
        • tony

          So Christians shouldn't follow the old testament's 10 commandments?

          December 21, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
    • moderatedave

      I would say far less than those not associated with Christianity.

      May 23, 2014 at 3:22 am |
  17. dan

    I don't understand why Phil cannot voice his opinion about an issue. When his opinion offends people it is a huge deal, but when a Gay voices his or her opinion and it offends people they will get off scott free. Is that not a double standard? regardless of beliefs.

    December 21, 2013 at 12:40 pm |
    • bostontola

      What are you talking about? He could and did voice his opinion. Religious people voice their opinion all the time. Gay people get discriminated against by religious. There are many discrimination suits every year. Getting fired for being gay is not Scott free.

      December 21, 2013 at 12:50 pm |
      • Andrew

        I'm a sinner and may not go to heaven, But it's absolutely ridiculous that Phi Robertson can't state his convictions without putting the world into an uproar. The intolerable in society are those that intolerably disagree with them. What a dichotomy!

        December 21, 2013 at 1:07 pm |
        • tony

          Tell that to Geico and their Gecko (google it if you don't remember)

          December 21, 2013 at 1:10 pm |
        • bostontola

          He can and did. The right to speak is not a right to be free from consequences. He will almost certainly be back on the show without missing one episode.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
    • FTC

      Dan,

      I think you miss the point. Phil signed a contract for that 200K he and his clan receives for each episode. IN that contract, there is probably a clause that states in exchange for all of that money, we will not cause embarrassment to the company that is paying him. As he is NOW a public figure. Sooo, he violated his contract. It is up to the discretion of the employer to determine that. If Phil didn't like that clause, maybe he shouldn't have signed it in exchange for all that money?

      Now, if he wants to give all that money back...so he can preach his version of the bible, so be it. Free speech isn't free anymore when you get paid.... And the gov't didn't do anything to Phil. He's not in jail is he? So his rights have NOT been violated. Don't blame the "devil" for implementing the contract you yourself willingly signed.

      December 21, 2013 at 1:00 pm |
      • Andrew

        So you read the contract??

        December 21, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
        • tallulah13

          There is generally a clause in contracts like these that covers public behavior. That way the network can act to protect itself if its employee does something illegal or controversial. There is a lot of money at stake and the network people aren't stupid.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
        • FTC

          No, I did not read the contract...but it's obvious you can't read... Because I used the term "probably" in my assertion.

          As in all likelihood, in all probability, as likely as not, (very/most) likely.

          Reading comprehension.... Learn it, live it, love it.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:41 pm |
    • Realist

      --------------
      ...................................................

      Christianity is built upon a LIE ...

      ................ because ....................

      ..... http://www.GodIsImaginary.com ...

      ... and thank goodness because he ...

      ............. emanates from the .............

      ...................... http://www.EvilBible.com

      -----------------
      .............................................................

      December 21, 2013 at 2:18 pm |
  18. victory4mccain08

    The Bible is very clear on the topics of which Mr Robertson spoke. When folks try to make the word read differently than the Bible's intent, that is where people start to disagree. Now, think about the fact that these words of God, as we know from the scripture, were written as God gave the authors guidance through the Holy Spirit. Then ask your self, would God have tried to confuse the people he so desired to have follow Him? Or, would He have ensured clear direction be written. Knowing the God is righteous, just, and loving – not wanting anyone to be lost – I conclude He ensured the words were laid out clearly and directly. God bless those who seek and value His words over their own desire for what they may want those words to mean.

    December 21, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
    • igaftr

      Then why is so much of the bible clearly false?
      Why are there 40,000 versions of the clearly written bible religions?
      Why, if I ask 100 Christians, I will get 100 different answers?

      December 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm |
      • Michael Girouard

        Because that's what happens when people start interpreting the Bible to reflect their own prejudices or agendas. The problem might not be the source material as much as the people reading it, and the way they persecute anyone, other Christians included, who do not share their interpretation. That applies to any religion that is subject to interpretation or revision after it was initially codified, which means all of them.

        December 21, 2013 at 12:57 pm |
        • bostontola

          You forgot the possibility that the source material is bogus and the readers interpretations are bogus.

          December 21, 2013 at 12:59 pm |
        • tony

          Mush of the bible was edited and/or re-written over and over thanks to a bunch of early popes (and later US sects like the Mormons and Jehova Witnesses. So it's already been re-interpeted beyond control.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
        • Jack Hilift

          Man makes God in Man's own image.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
      • Andrew

        Probably because you have *carefully* studied the Bible

        December 21, 2013 at 1:20 pm |
    • bostontola

      Deuteronomy 25:11-12.

      "If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity."

      December 21, 2013 at 12:46 pm |
  19. Gene

    People will distort anything and everything to justify what they do. It's just human nature.

    December 21, 2013 at 12:31 pm |
  20. Jay

    ALL you people are disgusting fighting amongst each other, with all this "He said, she said B.S." Pure gossip. You won't be sounding off too much when you meet your maker! I hope they cancel that pointless show anyways! Oh yeah, MERRY CHRISTMAS!

    December 21, 2013 at 12:30 pm |
    • igaftr

      Ah the threats from the christians.....

      Quetzlcoatl will not be happy with you for worshipping the wrong god.

      December 21, 2013 at 12:46 pm |
      • Don

        Ah, the old spaghetti monster argument. It's a red herring and a straw man all rolled up into one. Congrats.

        December 21, 2013 at 12:50 pm |
        • tony

          Yours is the non sequitur:

          Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All invalid arguments are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
        • tony

          Yours is the non sequitur

          Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All invalid arguments are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.

          December 21, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.