It seems to me you indicated you are a charismatic evangelical Catholic who felt led to identifiy as an Evangelical. Further I understand that you deem "those who hold most strongly to Scripture being the supreme authority as the wholly inspired and assured word of God, accurate in all of the principles it teaches" can belonog to any denomination, but are primarily self-identifying Evangelicals. I note this is not an Independent Fundamentalist (Baptist usually goes here) point of view. It seems to me the Billy Graham Organization (not organism) dovetails nicely with this view. However, there can be problems. Previously, Mormons had been on the evangelical organization’s “cult” list, alongside Unitarians, Scientologists, Spiritists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and adherents of the Unification Church.
The association’s quiet embrace of Mormonism came after a gay-rights group pointed out that Mormonism remained on the list despite Graham’s support for Romney. Pretty soon the “cult” reference was gone from the website, the Religion News Service reports.
The association’s spokesperson asserted that the removal had to do with its wish to stay away from a highly contentious issue. “Our primary focus at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has always been promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” said the organization’s chief of staff, Ken Barun, in a statement, according to a story that appeared on the website of Christianity Today. “We removed the information from the website because we do not wish to participate in a theological debate about something that has become politicized during this campaign.”.
Furthermore I must confess that I am not persuaded by your explanations and arguments about John 17:20-23. I find them inadequate. Neither do I agree with the comments about the Jewish Apostles.
However, I do acknowledge you as a baptized Catholic who has sought other pastures according to your conscience, and that you have a zeal of God to serve the LORD Jesus Christ.
I am not alone in my amazement at the insistence of RCs that we must be following someone as supremely determinative of what we believe, from Luther to Osteen, and thus imagine that if they can impugn the character of such then it will somehow damage or destroy our faith.
This is due to their Roman conditioning "to think of men above that which is written," (1Cor. 4:6) and thus identify with them, creating disunity. However, to be a real Christian is to follow the Lord and validate men by that which is written, out of love for Truth, (Acts 17:26) and thus insofar leaders stop being consistent with plain Truth of Scripture then they are not to be followed..
And although the Billy Graham association has done much much good (including running newspaper ads in that state in April encouraging support for an amendment against same-sex marriage, resulting in the IRS contacting them), yet as it began compromising years ago by sanctioning Catholicism, thus it is not surprising that they would not want to offend Mormonism, a sola ecclesia cult, which shares many distinctive similarities with Rome, , along with critical differences ).
Furthermore I must confess that I am not persuaded by your explanations and arguments about John 17:20-23.
Well that is hardly surprising, as you simply cannot anyway if it would impugn an argument for Rome, which certainly fails of that unity.
However, I do acknowledge you as a baptized Catholic who has sought other pastures according to your conscience, and that you have a zeal of God to serve the LORD Jesus Christ.
I am not a Catholic regardless of the RC claim based upon her "indelible mark", which is just as much a manifest fantasy as believing RC kids are born again by being sprinkled. When you really do become regenerated, it will change one manifestly profoundly. Thank God.