Agreed. Which is exactly why I asked days ago "Is this really necessary?"
The RM chose to restore the thread with a warning to discuss only the topic. I think the article has been thoroughly discredited, however some will never see that.
The article was a vile hit piece. Nothing more.
That is absolutely untrue. The article quotes Graham. It doesn't pull these things out of thin air.
It's worthy of a discussion.
Either man must believe in Christ as the Bible says and that must become the highest duty of man, or it isn't true.
If Graham says that people can be saved WITHOUT Jesus, then that merits a discussion.
You may not agree with the author about the seriousness of what Graham has done through his compromise with universalism, but you can not deny that he has done it.