Billy Graham's Disobedience to the Word of God

Way of Life ^ | Not sure | David Cloud

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

I see that this was included in the original post. LOL! I've been commenting so long I forgot. I think there is also another Larry King interview.

The transcript anyway is authentic. I don't know what source you want me to get it from. The Schuller website? I would do it but you seem to have discredited my proof even if I find a better source.

It's a hard pill to swallow. I know that. But please be careful not to ending defending the indefensible. It's good to not believe every charge right off the bat. This one sadly is valid.

[M. Thatcher]

The transcript anyway is authentic. I don't know what source you want me to get it from. The Schuller website? I would do it but you seem to have discredited my proof even if I find a better source.

Look, your claiming it's authentic doesn't make it so. The very fact that these same precise snippets from this supposed transcript are passed around and cited with glee by these fringe types should be a major red flag to you. Track it down to a legit source, post the entire interview, and let's go from there. Yes, the Schuller website would count.

The truth is NEVER a hard pill to swallow. But let's start there.

[P-Marlowe]

WHO is Billy Graham?

He's a retired door to door brush salesman.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

So you are saying that all these sources have made up the interview, that Graham never actually said it? The argument can cut both ways. The fact that so many people have a problem with what Graham said should tell you something.

You are calling some very reputable people "fringe."

I've spent a lot of time on this already. I'll look for your proof, but there is no guarantee Schuller has the transcript posted. Further, it is funny how you see his sight as such a better source than John MacArthur's site, especially in light of your previous comments about him. But okay. I'll see what I can do.

[Quix]

I still believe that technically, what Graham said, can be true and Biblically so.

IF at the point of death, BECAUSE a person earnestly sought God; sought after God more or less fully, earnestly with all the light they had . . .

and therefore at the point of Death, Christ presents Himself to them and gives them a choice--they could be saved at that point.

It's not something I'd counsel anyone to hold out for--they could be very eternally sadly mistaken.

However, I'm not about to say God couldn't or wouldn't do it that way. There have been too many anecdotal reports from NDE's that He has done such.

In any case, Graham's statement did not rule out such folks becoming believers through evangelization.

HE HAS HAD A PASSION AND A FELT CALLING TO BE A PEACE MAKER AND BRIDGE BUILDER in as many Biblical ways as he could amongst the various Christian sects.

I read a lot of his more questionable statments as follwing from that mandate--wanting to more or less go to extreme lengths to avoid being a cause of division.

Given so many other folks so eager to cause division--it's a nice perspective from a true Evangelical.

He would likely change some of his statements on reflection. Who wouldn't?

[Quix]

That's my conviction, too.

God does things HIS way, not ours.

He even says that His ways are beyond our finding out.

Thankfully, He also declares that His mercy triumphs over His judgment.

Christ has been presenting Himself to many Muslims around the world in dreams and visions. Whole extended families have been won to God in this way. I'm not about to tell God how HE canNOT do His work in these end times.

[Quix]

I rather agree with you that Billy Graham has been a very faithful servant of Jesus Christ; Father; Spirit in season and out--high and low.

He was also trend breaking in insisting that his early crusades be integrated in the South.

I have absolutely no doubt of God's attitude toward Billy. And it's starkly different from Bro Cloud's, imho.

[Quix]

But what Graham meant in strict Biblical terms by that statement is entirely foggy at best. One can make of it whatever one will, like a Rorschach ink blot.

[Quix]

Thanks tons. Am humbled by your kind words.

PTL.

Trying to be Christ-like, FR kosher, loving yet truthful and thought provoking. Still a challenge, to me.

Thanks tons for your prayers.

[Quix]

"If we had more hell in the pulpit, we would have less hell in the pew." — Billy Graham
---

Sure a plenty true statement!

I think pulpits will continue down 2 roads . . . some more of accommodation and appeasement with the world, the flesh and the devil . . . and the other more in love with God; people and God's Truth fiercely presented.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

There are no archives on the site. So believe everyone else is a liar. I warned you. What you do with the information is your responsibility before God.

[Quix]

To my knowledge, Graham did NOT say such things:

---

The problem is with the details. Jesus saves, but he saves even good Muslims who don't know His name or believe the gospel. And Jews get a different way to heave also. Now I have a problem with THAT!
---

Those details were INFERRED and rather rabidly so, at that.

Certainly not a very glaring act of Christian love.

[Quix]

But even from the 'worst' of his 'documentation,' Cloud INFERRED tons from whatever Graham said. And, usually not showing a great deal of care being concerned about cotext, either.

[Quix]

So far, in my flawed observatons over my 59 years, I've

NEVER

observed Graham being a significant stumbling block to anyone but

fierce rabid satanist types hell bent for destruction at a break neck speed

and

the rabidly fierce pharisees of every stripe and group.

But I certainly haven't even sampled very widely.

[Quix]

You might be aware that . . .

to a lot of folks . . . seemingly especially hereon, . . .

"mystical" includes anything supernatural (even miraculous answers to Biblical prayers)

whether Holy Spirit breathed, fostered, or not.

[NonLinear]

But what Graham meant in strict Biblical terms by that statement is entirely foggy at best. One can make of it whatever one will, like a Rorschach ink blot.

So true.

Again, I only awarded the point as to whether the specific stated assertion by the author was defendable, not whether Graham was incorrect or not in his beliefs.

In refuting it, I confirmed my initial reaction: The "article" was a simple hit piece. Nothing more, nothing less. I begrudge the electrons wasted in making it appear on my screen!

(c8

[DarthVader]

The only mysticism on Billy Graham's site is his denunciation of it.

[Full Court]

because they are BOTH lies.

How can the truth be a lie?

[M. Thatcher]

So you are saying that all these sources have made up the interview, that Graham never actually said it?

No. I'm saying these sources are citing each other, which is curious. As a conservative journalist, I often see useful (to me) ridiculous comments supposedly by liberals quoted in conservative columns. But when I try to track down the actual quote, I often come across this phenomenon: conservative columnists quoting each other. Sometimes I am able to track down the quote to the original publication, wire service, or news program, which I then cite - but sometimes I discover that the quote is apocryphal or wildly distorted.

You are calling some very reputable people "fringe."

Who?

it is funny how you see his sight as such a better source than John MacArthur's site, especially in light of your previous comments about him.

I said Schuller was a jerk. But an official transcript of a Schuller interview on his official site is by definition a primary source. Do you not see the difference, journalistically?

BTW, I was able to find actual audio of some of the Graham statement

http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?keyword=graham&entiresite=true

Click on Rev. David DiCanio Wed 5/11/2005

You have to wade through a lot of dreck, and the "reporter" himself actually says Graham came back after the break and corrected himself, although that is not included in the sound byte.