Posted on 05/27/2015 9:41:01 AM PDT by Theo
I’m at a loss to explain the dogged defense of this creepy family.
A longtime friend of mine said, “Well, it isn’t as if they found child porn on his computer.” Uh...he was creating and living child porn.
I think you are referring to Jimmy Swaggart, not Billy Graham. And while they may have forgiven him, he certainly doesn't have the influence he once had.
Jim Bob covered up crimes that would have put his son in the Juvenile Justice system for a considerable time. And made his daughters hush it up so he could get a TV deal that made him considerable money for 10 years.
One of his daughters put a "Help" note in a book that was sold at a church book sale. They've been reliving their nightmare for a long time.
I mean, I kind of understand why people would feel some loyalty to the family - they have projected a “wholesome” image on TV for over a decade, and have been a strong voice on life and family values political issues.
BUT, all of their supposed wholesomeness is obviously wiped out by these allegations, and their work on any conservative political cause is now a liability for that cause. Like you, I am at a loss to explain how anyone could not see that.
they might not have nightmares. depends on the extent of the trauma and if they were predisposed to pts. only 1/4 of the general population is predisposed.
I have been shocked at the defensiveness people have over this family. The parents made a huge mistake in how they dealt with their son, yet they have many apologists out there condemning criticism as unbiblical.
When commenting on their negligence I had a blogger respond that there isn’t a single verse in the bible that supports my position. Seriously? I hadn’t said he should be punished, that he wasn’t redeemed nor that he was a threat now. I mentioned what he actually did and pointed out that their “treatment “ was grossly inadequate. Her response that I was attacking someone for what he did as a child and was unbiblical in doing so surprised me. She brought up the man in the New Testament who was forgiven for sex with his mother in law as an equal example. That’s not even close.
I’ve had to conclude that people have made idols out of this family and will do and say anything to keep their idols.
No, I am talking about Billy Graham passing out his grace to the national abuser bjclinton. My young children at the time had no choice but to get sex ed lessons by a pervert that people elected twice. I never heard of Gothard, until this scandal broke. Precedence sets patterns. bjClinton set precedence, I am not surprised other men figured if old bjclinton could use and abuse, and get the world's most infamous preacher, aside from the pope, to spread grace why should they not have the same.
During the Clintons perversions, I kept getting told by the billy graham followers, that I was required to 'love the sinner' but 'hate the sin'. Well, suddenly, what, no love for this sinner/criminal?
Course I have been accused of holding a grudge. I was raised with the motto 'never forget'.
You make some good points, but honestly, I’ve never seen them act all that wholesome. They preach it, and tell everybody how modest they are, but they talk about sex a LOT in front of their kids.
For me, any of their claims that they’re wholesome went right down the drain when I saw the golf course video of the father grinding into the mother in front of his daughter and her fiancee, telling the kids they couldn’t do that because they weren’t married.
I think they’re messed up.
I can even understand the family’s not wanting to make a federal case out of back when it happened. But if this skeleton were in my family’s closet, I would avoid making a “reality” show about my family. Especially a show in which I make extravagant claims about my family’s moral superiority to other peoples’.
http://www.preacherbiography.info/billy-graham/
On NBC television, Billy Graham flippantly excused President Bill Clinton’s lewd and lascivious sexual sins by declaring that, well, the man just can’t help himself. Clinton is handsome and virile, said Graham, and the girls are just “wild” over him.
I think this ought to be a great lesson that holiness is bestowed upon sinners (which is everybody) by the willingly accepted grace of God to the heart, not by shallow acts of image creation in the public eye.
If they hadn’t fallen on this, they could have fallen on some other thing, perhaps after the children went their own way and some went wild when out from under that roof.
An icon got smashed. Maybe it was for the good after all, because it showed us that icons are not what it’s all about, nor does America need icons.
Some people confuse joint culpability with excusing. The Clinton thing needed Monica (and vice versa).
Well I totally agree, even on the girls Facebook site there was a thread simply to wish Grandma Duggar a Happy Birthday. Yes there were many wishing her a Happy Birthday but some inserted their hate of Josh on their site. Well I let them have it and stated that they are re-victimizing the victims. They preach that they care about the victims so what do they do? yep rehash the past by having them to relive it.
Now I am reading some Freeper posts stating they chose to be in public. Yes they did but it does NOT mean they have to bring up the past. Again they do not owe me or you any past sins explanation simply because they wanted to do a show. So by that standard! That means no one should be holding a position in their community because of what they did in the past as teens.
You implied Billy Graham had infidelities/scandals with women.
I’m not aware of doctrine allowing ministers to be ‘scandalized’ with the sins of their parishioners.
Was he, the ordained minister, supposed to spurn someone who had sinned?
Did he give Clinton advice on how to conceal and cover up his dealings with grown women so he could get elected? Or become popular on TV?
Did he encourage him to wait until the statute of limitations had expired to confess?
Did he strong arm Clinton’s victims into forgiving something before they’d reached the age of reason themselves? (thinking of the 5yr old victim here...)
Don’t blame Billy Graham if you failed to protect your children from worldly influences.
And you’re not doing the Duggars any favors comparing their oldest son to Bill Clinton. Just so you know.
http://www.preacherbiography.info/billy-graham/
On NBC television, Billy Graham flippantly excused President Bill Clinton’s lewd and lascivious sexual sins by declaring that, well, the man just can’t help himself. Clinton is handsome and virile, said Graham, and the girls are just “wild” over him.
That sounds EXACTLY like something the Clintons would say.
first of all the entire incident was between children, is not uncommon at all, and is basically harmless...
Wrong.
A 14 year old boy, who was old enough to know better, was sexually molesting his sisters.
Siblings bickering with each other is common and basically harmless; sexual molestation of children is common (though it should be non-existent) and incredibly harmful. Abuse like this will often haunt people their entire lives.
If Josh Duggar has truly repented and the family has truly forgiven him (and I have serious reservations on both counts), I commend them. However, this DOES NOT diminish the severity of what he did and there is still a huge likelihood that he will do it again.
That would kind of fit with an overly rigid Gothard mindset. If you can Obey The Rules, you can do things that are way outside the spirit of the rules, and even worse you can think you don’t need God’s help to keep doing better and better.
I did not imply, hint or suggest Billy Graham had any sex with that woman. I said, because it happened, Billy Graham spread his grace over a perverse habitual abuser of women, bjclinton.
bjclinton publicly sexualized our nation and Billy Graham, his good buddy covered over his acts. FACT!!!!
Precisely my point.
Had they done the right thing, Josh likely would have had to move out of the home.
Probably in with his paternal grandparents who lived close by and didn’t have any children in the home.
If only to keep Josh away from ‘temptation’ while undergoing treatment and give his sisters time to recover themselves.
But that would have raised the question of whether JimBob had ‘control’ and ‘dominion’ over his own family and caused loss of face.
Not to mention not being as photogenic for a reality TV show...and all the money they’ve made from that.
I don’t look to your source, a Roman Catholic site highly critical of Protestants and Evangelicals, as unbiased. In fact by choosing such a biased site you now pull a question over your own position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.