Pat Robertson: A Baby May Be Demon-Possessed as Part of a “Generational Curse”

Leave it to televangelist Pat Robertson to answer the questions everyone’s asking. Or one crazy person, anyway.

During today’s episode of The 700 Club, a viewer asked whether babies could be demon-possessed.

The correct answer is “No.”

Robertson’s answer was… not that.


CALLER LISAMy question is regarding demon possession. Can babies be possessed, and if so, does the Age of Accountability come into play for salvation?

ROBERTSON: … I just believe if that child is born to a family of devil worshipers, there’s a real possibility that the Devil will think that he has a claim over that child. I mean, it’s horrible to contemplate, but I don’t think that they’re protected in some fashion from what’s, I mean, a generational curse…

First of all, what the hell is going on in Lisa’s life that this question even pops up? (Lisa, get help.)

Second, WHAT?! Where are these devil-worshiping families? Why have I never met a Demon Baby? How is a Demon Baby different from regular evil babies? Who started this generational curse? HOW?!

Robertson didn’t answer any of the questions that truly mattered. But his response garnered no follow-ups from his co-host. They just went on to the next caller.

9 thoughts on “Pat Robertson: A Baby May Be Demon-Possessed as Part of a “Generational Curse”

    • Hello Polly. Clips of these people? Yes I do if I am going to post it. It is part of my responsibility if I am going to report on it. And I think it is important that people know what these people are pushing and other people really believe. Think how this woman asking may now think her grand kids may be devil filled. Horrible. We must not only fight against such ideas but enlighten those people who really believe that crap. Hugs

      Liked by 1 person

  • Scottie, preaching specific armageddons over the decades should have convinced folks that Ol’ Pat maybe should not be heeded when he preaches yet another one. It is not too dissimilar with the End of the World prophet who keeps setting dates for the end of the world, but we still remain after the date comes and go. It is like the retreating line in the sand. Keith

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hello Keith. While most of us do not put stock in Ol’ Pat’s murmurings, there are people who live by his utterings. This is he danger of him and people like him. Too many kids have been killed by people trying to drive the devil out of them. He just gave credence to that belief. That is the scary part. More children will be hurt or die due to him and what he said. But no matter how much he distorts the message of God’s love very few religious leaders will call him out. Hugs

      Liked by 1 person

  • You know, of course, that clear thinking often diminishes as one ages … and ole’ Pat-baby is pushing 91 years. Add to that the constant and ongoing indoctrination of Christian-ese, his response fits the mold.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nan, as long as I have been around, the thinking has tended to be more cloudy than clear. Call me crazy, but to say a supreme being is punishing entire cities with natural disasters for the perceived sins of a few is not the best of arguments. Using his argument, I would like to know why the 2008 and 2012 GOP conventions were shortened by one day due to hurricanes? Was a supreme being punishing the party? It becomes even funnier when we think that one of the conventions was held in the hurricane hot bed of Minneapolis. Keith

      Liked by 2 people

      • Hello Keith. I know you are talking with Nan, but can I add something to the discussion? Religious leaders like to blame disasters on minority groups through out history, but if those groups really had that power to bring about such disasters, wouldn’t that make them more powerful and to be courted? I have to laugh when they say gays are the cause of this flood or that earthquake, because if we had that power we would have been able to legally marry long before 2015. Hugs

        Liked by 2 people

        • Scottie, what adds further bemusement is when the Supreme Court rule California’s Proposition 9 unconstitutional, they said the plaintiffs had “no standing.” In other words, if gays/ lesbians got married, it matters not to heterosexual couples. So, impacting a flood would be well out of reach. Keith

          Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.