Posted on 03/05/2018 6:41:26 PM PST by metmom
Evangelist Billy Graham lived 99 years, wrote 30 books, met with 12 sitting American presidents and preached the gospel to millions. But when he is buried this Friday, March 2, in his hometown of Charlotte, North Carolina, he will be remembered not only as a world-changing hero of faith but as a humble preacher whose personal integrity set the gold standard for every minister in this country.
Why was this man so respected? How was he able to keep his ministry free from scandal for more than 75 years?
In 1948, when Graham was just 30 years old, he and his small ministry team met for Bible study and prayer at a tiny motel in Modesto, California. The other men in that meeting including assistant evangelist Grady Wilson, singer George Beverly Shea and song leader Cliff Barrows. Graham challenged them to pray about what codes of behavior they needed to adopt in order to keep the ministry clean.
The results of that meeting were profoundly prophetic. The men outlined what would become "the Modesto Manifesto"—a list of core ministry values that became the guiding principles of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. The BGEA was founded two years later, in 1950, just one year after media coverage of Graham's eight-week gospel campaign in Los Angeles made him a household word.
Here are the four key components of the Modesto Manifesto, along with notes that Cliff Barrows jotted down in their meeting:
Honesty: "It was resolved that all communications to media and to the church would not be inflated or exaggerated. The size of crowds and the number of inquirers would not be embellished for the sake of making BGEA look better."
Integrity: "It was resolved that financial matters would be submitted to a board of directors for review and facilitation of expenditures. Every local crusade would maintain a policy of 'open books' and publish a record of where and how monies were spent."
Purity: "It was resolved that members of the team would pay close attention to avoiding temptation—never being alone with another woman, remaining accountable to one another, etc. A practice of keeping wives informed of their activities on the road and helping them feel a part of any and all crusades they undertook would be encouraged."
Humility: "It was resolved that members of the team were never to speak badly of another Christian minister, regardless of his denominational affiliation or differing theological views and practices. The mission of evangelism includes strengthening the body of Christ as well as building it!"
Graham has always been a spiritual hero to me for this reason. Early in his ministry—in fact, before he ever became famous—he realized that his ministry was a stewardship from God and that he could not run it any way he wanted. He had to manage it according to clear biblical principles.
Graham never forgot his humble roots, and he never let popularity change him into an egotistical monster. Even though he was invited to dine with presidents, queens and celebrities, his passion was taking the message of Christ to the common person. And when an usher tried to segregate black and white sections of an auditorium in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in 1953, Graham removed the barriers himself. Related Articles
"I am not a great preacher, and I don't claim to be a great preacher," he once said. "I've heard great preaching many times and wished I was one of these great preachers. I'm an ordinary preacher, just communicating the gospel in the best way I know how."
He also carried with him a healthy fear that he might try to touch God's glory or take credit for evangelistic results.
Graham said: "So many people think that somehow I carry a revival around in a suitcase, and they just announce me and something happens—but that's not true. This is the work of God, and the Bible warns that God will not share His glory with another. All the publicity that we receive sometimes frightens me because I feel that therein lies a great danger. If God should take His hand off me, I would have no more spiritual power. The whole secret of the success of our meetings is spiritual—it's God answering prayer. I cannot take credit for any of it."
So much of what we call ministry today has been compromised by ego, marketing and man-made agendas. Some of our own "Spirit-filled" preachers are happy to sell a healing or a financial miracle for $29.95. Others claim spiritual superiority because they have the largest following on social media or because so many lined up to attend their packed conferences.
We have exchanged honesty, integrity, purity and humility for hype, fake anointing, manipulated photos, inflated attendance reports, sensuality and boastful swagger. God forgive us.
Billy Graham raised the bar for all ministers. I pray we will never forget his legacy.
In the world’s broad field of battle,
In the bivouac of Life,
Be not like dumb, driven cattle!
Be a hero in the strife!
My parents (and pious grandparents) were faithful to the charge to raise me in the knowledge and practice of The Faith. At every opportunity I was exposed to every advantage that a PK could have, including confirmation, reception into membership, involvement in church activities. etc.
So, who was to say that I was not a Christian? Only those that saw as I matured and married, that I finally participated in the wrecking of my life and my marriage by my ungodly unchristian behavior. And they were right. I was not an atheist or pagan; I was just another unregenerated, sin-practicing believer.
But eventually, when everything caught up with me and I had nowhere else to go, all my previous Christian exposure came to bear, and having read the New Testament through, I saw that I had nowhere to turn except to The Lord of All, Jesus The Christ, knowing that it was either all of me forever, or else nothing but badness for everywhere.
It was then that I knew that an unreserved commitment of myself into His care was the only acceptable resolution, so that is the decision I made. That was at the age of 34. I am now 81, and God has protected, nurtured, and preserved me all along. He has kept on saving me.
So: did the infant baptism begin the process of sanctifying me for his use, all along? Certainly I was not saved BY baptism as an infant, but was I eventually saved THROUGH baptism--that is kept BY God THROUGH His saving graces all along until THROUGH faith in Jesus as my Master-Owner, I was baptized by the Spirit, and subsequently immersed in the believer's baptism (actually by my Methodist minister father, together with my believing children. all four).
Are you going to sit there at your computer and write that God and His Son didn't do ALL the saving, all along. that my infant baptism did not derive from the denomination's determination to function as an encouraging environment that pictures God's love?
I do not believe in baptismal regeneration, infant OR adult, nor would I even give lip service to the ritual of paedobaptism, but I would be careful about how I handle those who have not yet come to a spiritual maturity to accept that kind of ritual as Scripturally, logically, and practically indefensible.
It is my perception that such a process was in Dr. Graham's mind when and if he made the pronouncement that you have quoted. Apparently you have not got to the point that you can back off and say, "Maybe I was wrong in interpreting what he said," but if you think about it for a while, you might see it that way, and perhaps even apologize.
That was a beautiful testimony and I’m so glad you shared it. I think it deserves its own post.
Since I now know you are my elder, I’ll bestow the esteem to which I think you deserve and, with your kind grace, end the argument.
My best to you.
I am NOT Catholic. I only subscribe to God’s Word, as being correct. Salvation is a choice.
Salvation does NOT come from a Pastor/Priest, nor a parent, or Mary, and it does not come from Baptism. Baptism is a required action. Priests/Pastors and Mother Mary are all Holy choices, but cannot give you Salvation thru Prayer, or thru Baptism.
Children will come to Christ as they are taught, and people around them are good examples of Christianity.
Matthew 19:14 14Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
Luke 18:16 16But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
Mark 10:13-16 13People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” 16And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them.
Church and family should set good examples, and lead children to accept Jesus Christ, and be Baptised. Their infant Baptism is not invalid, it just isn’t Salvation, imho.
https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/does-baptism-save-you-a-biblical-analysis/
https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/15-bible-verses-about-baptism/
Just echoing the published testimony of the most outstanding evangelist of the last two centuries, Rev. Charles Finney, on why he left freemasonry, by the evangelist who made Billy Graham look like a piker.
I invite you or any other freemason to take Finney’s test at the conclusion of this article, regarding masonic vows.
“Why I Left Freemasonry”
Introduction:
“If I had a sword and went through the aisles piercing people, I could not pierce people as fast as they were falling out of the pews”,
... quoted Finney who often preached so hard people would fall in the aisle, screaming for mercy and asking God to save them.
Many consider Finney to be the father of modern revivalism, with over 500,000 conversions. He began his life as a lawyer, and during his studies he found many laws were based on the Bible, so in 1821 troubled and unfocussed, Finney took a long walk in the woods and it was here that he was saved.
He remembers being alone with God kneeling in prayer and being converted, and he felt “as if waves of liquid love were flowing throughout my body” he would later say of this profound event.
From that day on he became a minister of the gospel, and was licensed to preach in 1823. Finney ignited a revival fire that would sweep across the country. Referred to as the “nine mighty years”, 1824-32, he conducted powerful revival meetings throughout the Eastern states.
It was in Rochester where “the place was shaken to its foundations” - 1200 people united with the churches of Rochester Presbytery, over 40 of the converts entered the ministry.
Fifteen hundred revivals broke out in other towns as a result of Rochester! It is felt that Finney carved the original path for mass evangelists such as D.L. Moody, Billy Sunday, and Billy Graham.
During his 40 years as a dramatic evangelist he also found time to write 17 books, four of which are in print today, and lectured for 31 years at Oberlin College until his death.
Someone said of Charles Finney, “he was a man of the wilderness, not damaged by religious or traditional thought patterns, but trained and raised of God and filled with the Holy Spirit.”
Why I Left Freemasonry
By Charles G. Finney, D.D.
When I was converted to Christ I had belonged to the Masonic Lodge in Adams, New York, about four years. During the struggle of conviction of sin through which I passed, I do not recollect that the question of Freemasonry ever occurred to my mind.
New Views of Lodgism
But soon after my conversion, the evening came for attendance upon the Lodge, and I went. They, of course, were aware that I had become a Christian and the Master called upon me to open the Lodge with prayer. I did so, and poured out my heart to the Lord for blessings upon the Lodge. I observed that it created considerable excitement. The evening passed away, and at the close of the Lodge I was asked to pray again. I did so, and retired much depressed in spirit.
I soon found that I was completely converted from Freemasonry to Christ, and that I could have no fellowship with any of the proceedings of the Lodge. Its oaths appeared to me to be monstrously profane and barbarous.
At that time I did not know how much I had been imposed upon by many of the pretensions of Masonry. But, upon reflection and examination, a severe struggle and earnest prayer, I found I could not consistently remain with them.
My new life instinctively and irresistibly recoiled from any fellowship with what I now regarded as “the unfruitful works of darkness.”
Quietly Withdrawing Membership
Without consulting anyone, I finally went to the Lodge and requested my discharge. My mind was made up. Withdraw from them I must — with their consent if I might; without this consent if I must. Of this I said nothing; but somehow it came to be known that I had withdrawn.
They therefore planned a Masonic festival and sent a committee to me, requesting me to deliver an oration on that occasion. I quietly declined to do so, informing the committee that I could not conscientiously, in any wise, do what would show my approval of the institution, or sympathy with it.
However, for the time, and for years afterward I remained silent, and said nothing against Masonry; though I had then so well considered the matter as to regard my Masonic oaths as utterly null and void. But from that time I never allowed myself to be recognized as a Freemason anywhere.
Beginning a Public Testimony
This was a few years before the revelations of Freemasonry by Captain William Morgan were published.
(Morgan was murdered on September 11, 1826, after becoming a Christian and attempting to publish an expose of freemasonry. His murder became the impetus for the “anti Mason Party” with President John Quincy Adams; the anti Mason party became the foundation for the Whigs, which in turn was the foundation for Lincoln’s Republican Party. September 11th is reported as the actual birthdate of Christ among many scholars and was known to be so at that time.)
When (Morgan’s) book was published, I was asked if it was a true revelation of Freemasonry. I replied that it was so far as I knew anything about it, and that as nearly as I could recollect, it was a verbatim revelation of the first three degrees as I had myself taken them. I frankly acknowledged that that which had been published was a true account of the institution, and a true expose’ of their oaths, principles and proceedings.
After I had considered it more thoroughly, I was more perfectly convinced that I had no right to adhere to the institution, or appear to do so; and that I was bound, whenever the occasion came, to speak my mind freely in regard to it, and to renounce the horrid oaths that I had taken.
Masonic Oaths Procured by Fraud
I found that in taking these oaths I had been grossly deceived and imposed upon. I had been led to suppose that there were some very important secrets to be communicated to me; but in this I found myself entirely disappointed. Indeed I came to the deliberate conclusion that my oaths had been procured by fraud and misrepresentations; that the institution was in no respect what I had been informed it was; and as I have had the means of examining it more thoroughly, it has become more and more irresistibly plain to me that Masonry is highly dangerous to the State, and in every way injurious to the Church of Christ.
Features of an Anti-Christ
Judging from unquestionable evidences, how can we fail to pronounce Freemasonry an unchristian institution? We can see that its morality is unchristian. Its oath-bound secrecy is unchristian. The administration and taking of its oaths are unchristian and a violation of the positive command of Christ. And Masonic oaths pledge its members to some of the most unlawful and unchristian things:
1. To conceal each other’s crimes.
2. To deliver each other from difficulty, whether right or wrong.
3. To unduly favor Masonry in political action and in business matters.
4. Its members are sworn to retaliate and persecute unto death the violators of Masonic obligations.
5. Freemasonry knows no mercy, and swears its candidates to avenge violations of Masonic obligations unto death.
6. Its oaths are profane, taking the Name of God in vain.
7. The penalties of these oaths are barbarous, even savage.
8. Its teachings are false and profane.
9. Its designs are partial and selfish.
10. Its ceremonies are a mixture of puerility and profanity.
11. Its religion is false.
12. It professes to save men on other conditions than those revealed in the Gospel of Christ.
13. It is wholly an enormous falsehood.
14. It is a swindle, obtaining money from its members under false pretenses.
15. It refuses all examinations, and veils itself under a mantle of oath-bound secrecy.
16. It is virtual conspiracy against both Church and State.
Some Fair Conclusions
No one, therefore, has ever undertaken to defend Freemasonry as judged by the above. Freemasons themselves do not pretend that their institution as revealed in reliable books, and by some of their own testimony, is compatible with Christianity. So it must follow that,
First, the Christian Church should have no fellowship with Freemasonry; and those who adhere intelligently and determinately to such an institution have no right to be in the Christian Church. We pronounce this judgment sorrowfully, but solemnly.
Second, should the question be asked, “What shall be done with the great number of professed Christians who are Freemasons?”
I answer, let them have nothing more to do with it.
Let it be distinctly pressed upon their consciences that all Masons, above the first two Degrees, have solemnly sworn to conceal each other’s crimes, murder and treason alone excepted; and that all above the sixth Degree have sworn to espouse each other’s cause, and to deliver them from any difficulty, whether right or wrong.
Third, if they have taken those Degrees where they have sworn to persecute unto death those who violate their Masonic obligations, let them be asked whether they really intend to do any such thing. Let them be distinctly asked whether they intend to aid and abet the administration and taking of these oaths. Or if they still intend to countenance the false and hypocritical teachings of Masonry. Or if they mean to countenance the profanity of their ceremonies, and the partiality of their sworn practice. If so, surely they should not be allowed their place in the Christian Church.
Fourth, can a man who has taken, and still adheres to the Master’s oath to conceal any secret crime of a brother of that Degree, murder and treason excepted, be a safe man with whom to entrust any public office? Can he be trusted as a witness, as a juror, or with any office connected with the administration of justice?
Fifth, can a man who has taken, and still adheres to, the oath of the Royal Arch Mason be trusted to public office? He swears to espouse the cause of a companion of this Degree when involved in any difficulty, so far as to extricate him, whether he be right or wrong. He swears to conceal his crimes, MURDER AND TREASON NOT EXCEPTED.
Is such a man bound by such an oath to be trusted with office? Ought he to be accepted as a witness or juror when another Freemason is a party in the case? Ought he to be trusted with the office of Judge, or Justice of the Peace, or as a Sheriff, Constable, Marshal or any other office?
What Is Your Answer?
I appeal to your conscience in the sight of God, for an honest answer to these three questions:
1. Is any man who is under a most solemn oath to kill all who violate any part of Masonic oaths, a fit person to be at large among men?
2. Ought Freemasons of this stamp to be fellowshipped in the Christian Church?
3. Do you believe that the sins of Masonic oaths are forgiven only to those who repent? And that we do not repent of those sins to which we still adhere? And that adherence makes us also partaker of other men’s sins?
“The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from ALL sin.” “And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure” (I John 1:17; 3:3).
Reprinted from “Memoirs” of President Finney, formerly of Oberlin College.
Copied from a tract published by National Christian Association — publishers since 1868 of literature exposing secret societies.
Your description of what you believe baptism consists of is quite clear and lines up pretty much with what the Bible says. The links are also to explanations that are quite adequate even if they are not written in the style of a theologian. I appreciate your slant on salvation an feel that I can relate to you as a fellow child of God.
To be baptized in water is an ordinance, a command of Christ to be followed by those that know they have placed their full trust in Jesus unreservedly, but most people really do not know what the significance of it is.
There are cases in which immersion is just not feasible, and God does not require it for one to enter His Heaven. But it is a public admission of one's faith, and of one's willingness to become a member of a local assembly of believers as an ongoing disciple, a functional student of the Ways of God.
Think of being sworn into service as a newly recruited soldier, and you will get the idea of what the rite of baptism is for. It is an official public recognition of one's willingness to be irreversibly inducted into the service of God as a Blood-purchased wholly-owned servant of Jesus, He being the Master, with other commissioned, trained, and spiritually mature servants as your guides in fulfilling your role in the church, the body of Christ, the person doing the baptizing being one of them.
The water baptism is one of the seven different baptisms found in the New Testament. A fuller discussion of them is found at the Happy Heralds web site:
Furthermore, I have known about Charles Finney for many years, and do not count him as on of my guides to salvation or a fulfilling life in Christ.
Actually, I have never considered being a Mason, nor did my father set me such an example. But I do know a few men who have been involved with the Masons who are also active and faithful in their churches.
It is enough for me that many of them were Founders of this nation and its Constitution (George Washington being one), who risked their lives and fortunes that we might have a free country; and who were also at the fore of defending the frontier communities against heathen and criminals who would have sacked these outposts of civilization were it not for the Blue Lodge backbone of faithful law-abiding God-fearing citizens meeting to bring order to their locality.
I am not going to worry about freemasonry as I would about liberal teachers in our schools and universities. I would not be surprised to find quite a few FR participants holding Masonic membership and being solid in conservatism and Constitutionality in their views.
I didn't mean that you needed to apologize to me, but you might think of "metmom" and "boatbums" in that respect, both of whom have more than earned my high regard as reliable commenters on religious issues.
Fare thee well.<>
1. We are always to correct and “judge” false theology and false teaching propagated by those who call themselves Christians. It is only for those outside the church whom we are not to judge; “those inside, ye are the judges”.
2. We are told never to be “unequally yoked” with unbelievers in marriage or business or any circumstance; the oaths of freemasonry compromise a believer in this manner.
3. We are not to even eat a meal with someone who calls himself a brother, but is living an immoral lifestyle. (But conversely, we are to give “every man an answer” for our faith to those who do not profess Christ).
4. We are told to seek the kingdom first, and all other worldly concerns will be taken care of by the Lord; i.e. we are not to get ourselves into oath-bound situations for the sake of worldly or professional gain.
5. Mormonism and masonry are nearly identical and both are Anti Christ doctrines of demons, of which Christ warns us against, over and over again.
6. Masonry's ecumenicalism itself is a warning for all Christians. All roads do not lead to Heaven; but instead Christ teaches: “the road to heaven is narrow, and few find it.”
7. You answered none of Finney’s salient points agaisnt Masonry but instead, described his Christian testimony of why he left Freemasonry as an “harangue”?
Man up and be a Berean. Put Finney’s words to the test of scripture for us instead of slighting the testimony of a great man of God, which I'm sure grieves the Holy Spirit.
I know that in Masons, one is called ‘Master’, and Mathew 23:10 is Jesus saying ‘not to be called Master. Here is a link you might find interesting on the subject.
http://www.cmalliance.org/about/beliefs/perspectives/secret-societies
The pope dude ain’t a catholic? That is news.
I may not be very concerned with ‘ritual’, but I am humbled by your testimony. A very beautiful post.
She’s got the right to post here.
FReepers need to beware people who want to shut other people down.
She’s not a troll, she’s doing her duty as a Christian Berean, as the Lord Himself instructs... “test all things”
If you are really a Christian, you will uphold her important curiousity about a man who will be held to a higher standard than most by the Lord because of his postion in life.
And you know what the Word says about “being held to a higher standard”... right?
That God will judge those teachers (and evangelists) to a higher standard because of their vaunted position. Billy will be judged much more harshly than the rest of the church, even as the church will be “judged first”...
That was kind of you. Thank you.
I do just want to clarify, I’m not holding myself up as some kind of great Christian who is better than Billy Graham. I’m sure I’m not even a good Christian.
But I do know this:
I know not why God’s wondrous grace
To me He hath made known,
Nor why, unworthy, Christ in love
Redeemed me for His own.
Refrain:
But “I know Whom I have believed,
And am persuaded that He is able
To keep that which I’ve committed
Unto Him against that day.”
Perhaps I’m not really as informed as to ‘God’s Ways’ as you are - but where do you come by the notion that ANYONE who may have made a mistake, will be judged more or less harshly by God?
That scripture can be read in a number of ways.
If there is ‘judgment’ at all, I think that God will look upon and judge Billy Graham very kindly, as compared to many others of us.
And after all: it isn’t OUR place to ultimately judge our fellow man - it seems we have too many beams in our own eyes, for that.
But God sees into the heart and into motivation in ways that we who try to judge our fellow man cannot.
I think it’s important to beware of arrogantly attempting to take on what is not our, but is God’s, responsibility.
The Disturbing Legacy of Charles Finney (click here)
A disturbing one, truly when one has lived in the area of New York State between Buffalo and Albany, which area was so consumed with the wildfires of false evangelism that it has the pejorative designation of "The Burned-Over Terrotory.
The unrealized dreams of cheap grace and easy believism so vitiated the Finneyized trail of gospel failures that people no longer even wanted to hear the truth. Grahamism with its "just pray this prayer" salvation and lack of applying the practice of separation, has again so aggravated this blanket approach that sincere attempts to reach sin-laden people there have been effectively neutralized, and unbelief now controls the hoi polloi.
Why do you think it is that politicians like the socialistic Cuomos and the Clintons and Schumers have a firm grip on the government and economy there that people are leaving the state in droves?
What he did or did not do with Masonry in the New York villages has little import when one regards his major deviations from Jesus' plan of bringing the Good News to people. His methods distinctively proceeding from the moralists' form of Arminian social gospel rejuvenation of society now distorts all church efforts there, even those of Catholicism.
I lived in this area, most of my young life until about age 48, and experienced the general coldness toward non-denominational outreach, including my own, until I was ruined.
I don't even want to revisit Finneyism and Crusadism again. I have no interest in debating it, nor that of Masonry.
And by what are we to judge? By the standard of the Word of God.
And what does Peter say about the Word of God? “Scripture is of no private interpretation”.
So be a Berean, those Jews who, after hearing Paul preach the Good News, put Paul to the test of scripture, and Paul commended them for doing so.
Scripture is the Truth. There are no shades of meaning. If you have a doubt about one aspect of the Word, you cross-reference it with another phrase or definition or usage elsewhere in the Bible...
...because the Bible interprets itself. It IS God, remember. The Word IS God... and then “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us”.
“Teachers shall be judged more harshly than other Christians” which is why Paul warns people who want to be in leadership in a church, because they will be judged by God in a stricter fashion.
Please reread your Bible. You are dead wrong. We are NOT to judge unbelievers, of whom God is the judge. We ARE to judge fellow Christians as to their adherence to “that which has been preached”.
Lord bless. But Billy Graham of course knew that he would be held to a higher standard by God when he set out to be a preacher.
It is healthy to give honor where honor is due, and God will even posthumously give honor in this manner, but we are always to put Christian leaders to the test of Scripture. Again Paul commended the Bereans for doing so.
And P.S. There needs to be a distinction between judging someone hypocritically for the sins you yourself commit (as Jesus warned) and “judging” a Christian who is preaching false doctrine or in error or in immorality. Of these “we are the judges”.
How Billy Graham Avoided Scandal His Entire Life.
Know what that is?
It's called the title to this thread.
You know what a troll is? Here's a simple definition:
a person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content. Internet trolls.
There is no rational connection between Billy Graham avoiding scandal and Billy Graham saying anything about baptism. If you felt it was so important to discuss a statement Graham made decades ago concerning baptism then why not start your own thread instead of burping it up on someone else’s thread about a completely different subject?
Yes, in my opinion, that is blatant trolling. Made much worse by the fact that Billy Graham was your target. I'm done wasting my time on the discussion. I wish you well on your Pharisaical journeys.
I’m sorry that you have been raked over the coals for daring to question Billy Graham’s life testimony and teachings.
Of course you weren’t holding yourself to a higher position than Billy. You were just doing what Paul commended the Bereans for doing to him: putting his teachings to the test of scripture!
Personally, I have some deep questions about certain incidents in Billy Graham’s life and I remain concerned about his RCC and political friends in high places as well.
As Jesus taught us to regard beloved preachers like Billy Graham (and scripture cannot be broken):
“Woe to you when all people speak well of you, for this is the way their ancestors used to treat the false prophets...”
Jesus said it all.
Naw, a troll is someone who makes personal false accusations, calls people names or heaps personal abuse about other FReepers or other contributors on a site.
Bodleian_Girl perhaps should start her own thread, but her points about Billy Graham are valid. I’m sure with some deeper research (she should call the guys at The Berean Call, Dave Hunt’s people, as they would have oodles of stuff on Graham), I’m sure with more research, Graham said a lot more nutty things about child baptism, probably due to his Catholic leanings.
Woe to Billy Graham if the world speaks well of him, for that is how the ancient Hebrews treated the false prophets...
Lay off B girl. I’ve got a trillion questions about Billy Graham. For example, he surely knew about the masonic accusation against him, so for heaven’s sake (literally) why didn’t he do an expose on masonry? Or a clear teaching as did Charles Finney?
Probably cuz Billy Graham was a mason, and was involved with the DeMolay organization, as accused (a very sad and stupid way to compromise your walk with the Lord).
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.