Billy Graham 1918-2018

Open discussion on general Baptist-related topics of interest to Baptists around the world.

Moderator: Dave Roberts

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jim » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:59 am

Rvaughn wrote: That year before that he [Graham] said, "The three gravest menaces faced by orthodox Christianity are communism, Roman Catholicism, and Mohammedanism." These things (opposition of Baptists to modernism and Catholicism) were not done in a corner.

It is religiously incorrect (probably politically incorrect, too) to say, but the three “faiths” are quite similar – hierarchical, incomprehensibly bloody history, and currently corrupt to an unimaginable degree, though only Catholicism of the three has eased up regarding bloodshed. Both communism and Islam, besides having nothing to do with God, are menaces worldwide by any physical measurement. Catholicism is spiritually harmful in its opulence, worship (weird hats/caps, incense-spray, gaudy robes (some so obviously expensive as to be tribal as in gathering formally at a missionary parboiling), law-breaking (mostly with immunity as in unreported priest-pedophilia), and insisting that such things as indulgences originated with St. Peter to be passed down through popes who were/are inerrant, never mind their many differences through the ages. Like I said—religiously incorrect, the words of a hopeless curmudgeon.
Jim
 
Posts: 3771
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Tim Bonney » Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:12 pm

Rvaughn wrote: It's not that hard to present yourselves as relatively pretty when comparing yourselves to ourselves. But we'll not mention your own separation from fundamentalists, inerrantists, primitivists, and such like, who confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Nor would we mention the problems of judgment, division, and separation within your own fellowships, conferences, and denominations.


Yeah, right. Fundamentalists attempted to remove my home church from the St. Louis Baptist Association. Fundamentalists in Missouri refused to seat Messengers from churches in Missouri that didn't do what they wanted. Friends of mine were fired for "not being perceived as being conservative enough." Seminary Presidents locked out of offices. Denominational leaders chased off for not signing the BFM 2000. Associations disfellowshipping churches with women Clergy or Deacons. Etc, etc, etc.

Yeah, my separating for fundamentalists is all my fault. As David might say, Baloney Cheese. You can't be ecumenical with people who don't want you around and did their darnedest to chase you and your family off.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5883
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby KeithE » Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:53 am

Rvaughn wrote: It's not that hard to present yourselves as relatively pretty when comparing yourselves to ourselves. But we'll not mention your own separation from fundamentalists, inerrantists, primitivists, and such like, who confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Nor would we mention the problems of judgment, division, and separation within your own fellowships, conferences, and denominations.


I certainly am not casting fundamentalists, inerrantists (or anyone) outside the love of God or their acceptance by God in any salvific matter. Nor would I keep anyone out of fellowships, conferences, or denominations that wanted to join in the mutual spiritual encouragement (barring any overt, sustained troublemaking in that encouragement); doctrinal matters can be freely discussed. It is true that some doctrinal matters are more conducive to spiritual growth, but not to total dimming of the possibilities of that growth (eg an open theology is better that an ‘it is already fixated’ Calvinism).

I hope that fundamentalists can have the same attitude towards others.

As for being “pretty”, that is in the eye of the beholder. :)
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8798
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Haruo » Fri Mar 02, 2018 12:03 pm

And now for something completely different. From the depths of the pseudepigrapha or someplace.

There's a FB group I belong to called "Non-Theist Quakers". I don't pretend to be one, on the rare occasions when I post there I always clarify that I am a Theist Baptist. But today this oddball take on Billy was posted there, and I thought of this thread. As a sort of appendix to the Rolling Stone article from what I take to be some off the wall sort of Messianic-Jewish viewpoint...
In 'Non-Theist Quakers' on Facebook, Allan Cronshaw wrote:Perhaps every Seeker should sincerely ask themselves: Will you find yourself standing next to Billy Graham in confusion when you pass from this life (see What Did Billy Graham Say? @ https://brotherofyeshua.blogspot.com/2018/03/what-did-billy-graham-say.html ). While virtually countless people know Intuitively that Bill Graham was not right in what he preached, unless you know what is true, and then act upon it in a positive manner, you will most likely find yourself right next to Billy Graham wondering what happened. In this article you will encounter one of the most important teachings on Children that was suppressed and removed from the Gospels. In fact, it is this teaching that Billy Graham was deprived of, that was the basis of his error. But as Seekers, unless you know how the Natural Laws are fulfilled, you will find yourself right next to Billy Graham when you get to the hereafter.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12171
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jim » Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:28 pm

KeithE wrote:I certainly am not casting fundamentalists, inerrantists (or anyone) outside the love of God or their acceptance by God in any salvific matter.

How thoughtful! What about an un-salvific matter?

Nor would I keep anyone out of fellowships, conferences, or denominations that wanted to join in the mutual spiritual encouragement (barring any overt, sustained troublemaking in that encouragement); doctrinal matters can be freely discussed.

I suggest you might consider this a penultimate oxymoron.


It is true that some doctrinal matters are more conducive to spiritual growth, but not to total dimming of the possibilities of that growth (eg an open theology is better that an ‘it is already fixated’ Calvinism).

Another oxymoron? An open theology is like an "open" marriage...worth absolutely nothing except penultimate mischief.


I hope that fundamentalists can have the same attitude towards others.

What exactly is that attitude? If it sounds good, believe it?

Jim
 
Posts: 3771
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Previous

Return to Baptist Faith & Practice Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests