| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2006 7:28:28 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Toxic thread turned personal |
Posted on 04/25/2006 6:19:21 PM PDT by Full Court
KJV Only = Advanced Revelationist Ignoramus I Know Better Than The Original Writers Club
*ROTFL*
Billy Graham may tolerate too many doctrinal errors, straining too hard for ecumenism, but this is funny.
I has to scan through what in print form would probably be several pages of text before I got to something other than "BILLY GRAHAM DOESN'T THINK THAT ALL CATHOLICS ARE DOOMED TO HELL!!!"
Well said!!!
Say, did you know that Brother Cloud is a missionary to India?
heeheehee
Say, did you know that Brother Cloud is a missionary to NEPAL?
Drats, I ruined the joke! But come to think of it, Brother Cloud sure sounds Indian to me! (But feather not dot).
‘I believe the Bible is the inspired, authoritative word of God,’ Graham says, ‘but I don’t use the word ‘inerrant’ because it’s become a brittle divisive word.’”
And THAT Cloud says is incorrect, even though his own attack PROVES it to be true.
"While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation."
And THAT is like the Pharisees who load bundles of precepts and rules on their students, that even they themselves could not carry. Seems to me I read somewhere that: "If you will confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God rasied Him from the dead -- YOU WILL BE SAVED".
The rest is extra. Not unimportant, not incorrect, but not necessary for salvation -- which is exactly what Dr. Graham said.
And the Bible Versions the writer attacks:
Revised Standard Version: At one point, before the over-whelming acceptance of NIV, the most common pew Bible in American Churches.
JB Phillips Bible: Not really a translation, or ever promoted as one -- but a delightful adaption, true in every way to the spirit of Christianity.
The Living Bible: That would be the version that has led more English-speaking people into the scripture in the last 40 years than all other versions combined.
Good News For Modern Man: Sort of like JB Phillips, and used in thousands of Bible studies for people who would have been mystified by KJV language.
In the past 20 years a couple of hundred Baptist churches in the US have changed their names, without changing their Biblical stances in the least.
They've simply dropped the name Baptist from their names -- People like this Cloud are the reason. They've ruined the proud name of Baptist, and made it stink.
One more thing -- Graham "turned converts over to apostate churches"???
No.
He turned them over to the Holy Spirit. Then as the Spirit led, those people found their path with God. Some of them became burning beacons in their own churches. Others, with the new guiding of the Spirit, eventually found their way to other churches.
Frankly from my own experience -- EXPERIENCE I SAY -- I would expect that any of those new converts that would have gone immediately to hateful, tiny, schismistic churches {Those churches ALWAYS remain tiny, because they always are splitting over some perceived "heresy" or other} would either have been put off, and fallen away, or else became as bad as the people they found in those churches.
For the discussion pleasure of Fr religion forum inhabitants
---
I'm still struggling to find the truth in that statement.
I'm curious if you'd find his life long habit of exiting an elevator if a woman gets on when he's on alone even though it's not his floor--just to avoid any remote chance of a woman accusing him of anything and bringing disrepute to The Gospel of Jesus Christ . . .
Would you call that an immoral habit of his?
Me too! I do not think that Franklin fell for Clinton's flim flam.
Even tho I agree with you about Billy Graham, I wish that I had read the article before I posted.
dude - before you go swingin with good ole Louisville hickory - y'all might want to investigate the beliefs of our church fathers - 'cause a good many held to the efficacy of infant baptism -
Rejection of infant baptism was cause for heresy back in the days of Calvin and Arminius , Luther, and a host of others
or are you foolish enough to call thier Christianity into question as well ?
I get a charge out of supposed Christians who tear down the works which stem from a true faith - ....us forum posters might haggle about Calvin or Arminius quite regularly - but we dont doubt thier belief - just the theology
this thread belies a deeper issue in your heart
dude - before you go swingin with good ole Louisville hickory - y'all might want to investigate the beliefs of our church fathers - 'cause a good many held to the efficacy of infant baptism -
Rejection of infant baptism was cause for heresy back in the days of Calvin and Arminius , Luther, and a host of others
or are you foolish enough to call thier Christianity into question as well ?
I get a charge out of supposed Christians who tear down the works which stem from a true faith - ....us forum posters might haggle about Calvin or Arminius quite regularly - but we dont doubt thier belief - just the theology
this thread belies a deeper issue in your heart
stop stuttering
A vile spew against a Godly man.
I agree and for the life of me don't understand it.
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.