-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Fundamentalist
- Thread starter antiaging
- Start date
The only problem with Chick's portrayal of the Vatican recruiting Graham through Hearst after WW2 is that Graham was a died-in-the-wool, hellfire preaching, liberal-fighting, Catholic opposing Fundamentalist in those days! John R. Rice mentored him and Bob Jones supported him! So Chick's narrative is based on a false premise.BobRyan said:
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The problem with that portrayal is that Graham did have leaders from all different denominations as part of his volunteer staff. He was not known for directing his listeners to any specific denomination.
IF someone here knows for a fact that he turned away Catholic or Orthodox clergy and would not let them minister during his crusades - please speak out.
Hint: I do know that he invited SDAs to participate.
IF someone here knows for a fact that he turned away Catholic or Orthodox clergy and would not let them minister during his crusades - please speak out.
Hint: I do know that he invited SDAs to participate.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
John of Japan said:The only problem with Chick's portrayal of the Vatican recruiting Graham through Hearst after WW2 is that Graham was a died-in-the-wool, hellfire preaching, liberal-fighting, Catholic opposing Fundamentalist in those days! John R. Rice mentored him and Bob Jones supported him! So Chick's narrative is based on a false premise.
This is acommon logical facalicy:
it happens with John Nelson Darby who is
condemned for teaching in 1828 what he taught in the
USofA after the civil war. Actually he (Darby or Graham)
grew a little in Grace in his last 40 years.
These young folks don't have 40 years of Bible study
under their belt to know: You can grow in Grace in
your last 40 yerars. (Goodness -- at my age I'm Cramming
for Finals
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
BobRyan said:
I can't give a defining answer. The town I was in
had maybe 2% Catholics and maybe two Orthodox persons.
It was one of the Movies that I ministered at.
This was in the late 1960s.
From the middle 1970s until today (22 Dec 2007) I
am a trained lay minister to those seeking salvation
(in our church we call them 'first responders' and even
list a couple of Men first responders and a couple of
women first responders. Others of us will come forward
at the invitation, if needed).
IMHO Seventh Day Adventists are generaly saved
individuals who band together for normal Christian
reasons. I know this by experience, not book learning.
:laugh: Never stop growing, amen?Ed Edwards said:This is acommon logical facalicy:
it happens with John Nelson Darby who is
condemned for teaching in 1828 what he taught in the
USofA after the civil war. Actually he (Darby or Graham)
grew a little in Grace in his last 40 years.
These young folks don't have 40 years of Bible study
under their belt to know: You can grow in Grace in
your last 40 yerars. (Goodness -- at my age I'm Cramming
for Finals
In those days, before the New Evangelical movement really got under way, all the fundamentalist mass evangelists were interdenominational. They just wouldn't include liberals or Catholics. John R. Rice even had Pentecostals (pre-Charismatic) cooperate in his crusades as long as they were for souls being saved.BobRyan said:
Gentlemen, Crusade is a roman catholic term. If you know anything about the crusades, they involved rape, murder and pillage of villages going from Europe all the way to the middle east to get to Jerusalem. The crusades were evil. Those were battle hardened sinnners among the crusaders, not real Christians.
So, who but a catholic spy, is going to name the work that he does for God a crusade?!!!
When I hear a minister call his work for God a crusade, [(like Benny Hinn--who was coached by Kathryn Kuhlman--Rivera said she was a catholic spy)] that is the first reason I begin to suspect him of being a catholic, pretending to be a protestant, and really serving the vatican.
[Chick said Hort and Wescot were closet catholics, and he's got the information to prove it.]
So, who but a catholic spy, is going to name the work that he does for God a crusade?!!!
When I hear a minister call his work for God a crusade, [(like Benny Hinn--who was coached by Kathryn Kuhlman--Rivera said she was a catholic spy)] that is the first reason I begin to suspect him of being a catholic, pretending to be a protestant, and really serving the vatican.
[Chick said Hort and Wescot were closet catholics, and he's got the information to prove it.]
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
I am not ready to dismiss Graham because he was inclusive at his evangelistic meetings OR because he called them "Crusades".
Those all seem like nits to me.
If you say that his teaching directed his listeners away from scripture, or obedience to Christ or any such thing I am ready to listen - but I have not heard it yet.
in Christ,
Bob
Those all seem like nits to me.
If you say that his teaching directed his listeners away from scripture, or obedience to Christ or any such thing I am ready to listen - but I have not heard it yet.
in Christ,
Bob
As a linguist, I have to tell you that words change in meaning, and one word can have many meanings. I think it is pretty strange to say someone is a Catholic spy simply because they use the word "crusade" for their evangelistic meetings.antiaging said:
Until the word became politically incorrect for the very reasons you are giving, it was used in English in a lot of contexts for a lot of efforts, both Christian and non-Christian. Were those various organizations all Catholic? Pshaw!
P. S. And remember, the Crusades were against the Muslims. I'm not pro-Catholic, but I'll take Catholics over Muslims any day! It was the Muslims who first conquored the Middle East by "rape, murder and pillage of villages" as you put it, and by forced conversions. Egypt, Iraq, Iran, all that area was once Christian until the Muslims took over and killed millions of Christians.
Last edited by a moderator:
John of Japan said:As a linguist, I have to tell you that words change in meaning, and one word can have many meanings. I think it is pretty strange to say someone is a Catholic spy simply because they use the word "crusade" for their evangelistic meetings.
Until the word became politically incorrect for the very reasons you are giving, it was used in English in a lot of contexts for a lot of efforts, both Christian and non-Christian. Were those various organizations all Catholic? Pshaw!
P. S. And remember, the Crusades were against the Muslims. I'm not pro-Catholic, but I'll take Catholics over Muslims any day! It was the Muslims who first conquored the Middle East by "rape, murder and pillage of villages" as you put it, and by forced conversions. Egypt, Iraq, Iran, all that area was once Christian until the Muslims took over and killed millions of Christians.
Matthew 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
You know how to be harmless as a dove. That's good. Now learn how to be wise like a serpent also, and you're doing what Jesus said.
I usually don't really think someone is a catholic spy until he gives himself away 3 times. I would consider using the word crusade, strike 1.
3 strikes and you're out.
Rivera is plainly saying that about Billy Graham from first hand knowledge.
Benny Hinn took over Kathryn Kuhlman's ministry after she died. The same organization of people that helped her started helping Benny Hinn. Alberto Rivera said from first hand knowledge Ms. Kuhlman was a catholic pretending to be a charismatic protestant. There is a photograph of her in an audience with the pope. She had a catholic mass or burial said for her at her death. A catholic spy like Ms. Kuhlman and her organization are only going to turn their ministry over to another catholic spy.
Then you hear Pat Robertson talking about how the pope is a man of God spreading the gospel. And you hear him say something like that on numerous occasions.
So, do you think it is allright for catholics to pretend to be protestant ministers, going to get their preaching papers at the colleges, and when they get a big following of protestants they make a fake sex scandal to make protestant churches look bad and try to destroy people's faith in the church leadership with fake scandals? Do you think that sort of thing is allright?
When a woman in the crowd touched the garment of Jesus and got healed he turned to his disciples and asked who touched Him because He didn't know who it was that got healed.
So how is it that so called pentecostal or charimatic preachers claim to know that someone in a certain area of a church has a particular ailment, by the word of knowledge, and he tells them to stand up, God is healing them.
They are using word of knowledge in a way that Jesus did not even do it.
So maybe its all pre arranged.
There was a guy doing that sort of thing. They found out that he had an earphone in his ear, and his wife was telling him with a radio transmitter where the people were sitting that had certain illnesses; they filled out an illness card upon entering the church. So he is pretending that he is getting words of knowledge about it. They exposed the guy. I saw on TV where he was exposed, and they spoke about him. He was back in the ministry after this. Just kept on going.
That is the sort of healing that Pat Robertson, Benny Hinn, Jim Bakker, Marvin Gormin, John Wesley Fletcher and others were showing off to the public.
Religion is big business. Alot of money can be made by con artists in this field.
Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Why don't you pray to God and ask Him to show you how to be wise like a serpent, in the way that Jesus meant it. It might help you to avoid being deceived by religious con artists.
I worked with a guy that used to be a protestant preacher with a radio ministry. People gave him expensive gifts, cars etc. One day he told the people that he never believed in Jesus. He went to bible college because his mother wanted him to. He resigned as pastor.
This is the day of the professional, in religion. You can get preaching papers by completing courses at bible college, and be an atheist preaching to the public. Of course you should realize an atheist is not being led by God.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, this is kind of insulting, intimating that I'm unwise and deceived by religious charlatans in spite of the fact that you know me only from a couple of posts on the BB.antiaging said:
FYI, I'm on record on the BB for opposing the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham at: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=4309
But that certainly doesn't mean I have to swallow Alberto's wild statements.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
// [Chick said Hort and Wescot were closet
catholics, and he's got the information to prove it.] //
Chick is full of himself
He can't prove it.
catholics, and he's got the information to prove it.] //
Chick is full of himself
He can't prove it.
Ed Edwards said:// [Chick said Hort and Wescot were closet
catholics, and he's got the information to prove it.] //
Chick is full of himself
He can't prove it.
At Chick's website click on search and look up Hort or Wescot. There are quotes by them. One of them was in favor of Mary worship. (maybe both)
The quotes that he has by them seems to show they were what he said, "closet catholics".
Hort and Wescot were the ones that proposed using the corrupted Alexandrian manuscripts and mixing them with the King James text (textus receptus or majority text) putting out the first of the corrupted bible versions the Revised Standard version. In every place wher the textus receptus disagreed with the corrupted vaticanus and sinaiticus manuscripts, the modern version RSV chose the corrupted text, producing a modern version that is about 5% in error in important places. Gnostic heretics changed words and added and deleted in the 4th century from those corrupted Alexandrian texts.
Mostly all of the other modern versions follow the same pattern and it is evident that it is the catholic church that is behind the modern versions.
Ralph Earle, of the international bible society said that the Greek
text of the NIV was basically that found in the United Bible
Societies/Nestle-Aland printed Greek New Testament text. This modern UBS/Nestle-Aland "eclectic"
text forms the basis for most of the modern translations of the New
Testament. [Eclectic means pick and mix.]
The joint UBS/Nestle-Aland Editorial
Committee was presided over by the renowned Jesuit named Carlo Maria
Martini, Cardinal Archbishop of Milan (the largest Roman Catholic
diocese in the world), President of the Council of European Bishops,
former Rector of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, "Rector
Magnificus" of the Gregorian University, and regarded by many as "the
Pope in Waiting".
In accordance with what was started by Westcott and Hort in 1881,
the translators of most of the modern Bibles had deserted the traditional New Testament text of the Greek speaking churches and had, instead, introduced rare and peculiar readings of a handful of obscure manuscripts, primarily (but
not exclusively) Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.
These minority readings, chosen from various sources, had been
introduced into the modern UBS/Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament text
under the supervision of the most prominent Roman Catholic Greek
Scholar in the world.
Information provided by Robert Stewart
So, there are thousands of copies, from different places, of the majority text or textus receptus, which all agree with each other, and the King James vesion is translated from that. You have about 5 corrupted manuscripts from Alexandria Egypt, (just one city) which disagree with each other in many places, and disagree with the KJV in 5% of important places. And the modern versions mix these corrupted manuscripts in with the majority text producing bibles with the words change, but they are appealing because they are in modern English.
[Alexandria Egypt was a center for the heresy of gnosticism and those gnostics took it upon themselves to mutilate the scriptures producing corrupted Greek texts. But they were on the most expensive parchiaments, and the dry climate in Alexandria allowed the parchiaments to last longer.
The majority or Byzantine text of the KJV can be traced back to the first peshitta (the text in Syriac) to AD 150 and the italic bible version of the Waldenses to AD 157.
The King James version text is the real original unaltered text. But it is in middle english so some don't like it. The majority of the modern versions have corrupted texts in which the words were changed, and they are not inspired in those places, but they are in modern English, so many like them.
I believe this is part of the apostacy prophecied in 2 Thessalonians, the falling away from the faith. They are falling away from the true Word of God, and now using corrupted bibles that have the words changed.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
//I believe this is part of the apostacy prophecied
in 2 Thessalonians, the falling away from the faith.
They are falling away from the true Word of God,
and now using corrupted bibles that have the words changed.//
TeeHee.
I have no idea why people copy stuff from other sources (illegal on this board)
That have already oft been copied by other people (who are now
banned for not using BB protocall). I myself have said it before:
The Prime Directive of bb (bullentin boards):
READ BEFORE YOU WRITE.
It will save a lot of repeated errors and grief.
Here is an Old Bible:
2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ,
and by our assembling vnto him,
2 That ye be not suddenly mooued from your minde,
nor troubled neither by spirit, nor by worde, nor by letter,
as it were from vs, as though the day of Christ were at hand.
3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes:
for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first,
and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,
Yep, this Bible (Like the Bishop Bible before it and
the King James Version after it) are written in early MODERN ENGLISH
(not middle English - hardly anybody on this BB can read middle English).
Yep, 2 Thess 2:3 has no mention of 'apostasy' in it.
It is the MVs (Modern Versions of the 20th Century /1901-2000/
that say 'apostasy in them, not the Great Old Bibles
of the 16th-18th Centuries: 16th (1501-1600),
17th (1601-1700), and 18th (1701-1800).
Oh, the Translators of the Geneva Bibles had the English word 'apostasy'
(brought from the Greek) meaning falling from the faith - but they
chose 'departing'. IMHO that means a departing from THE EARTH.
In verse one Paul says He will talk about the 'assembling' conducted
by Jesus - here is where he speaks of it again: in 2 Thess 2:3.
That is the way I believe and I prove it from the KJVs
NOT from the MVs. TeeHee - searching for a Bible that proves
my theory and end up using the KJVs not my MVs.
But anybody could have looked that up, if they were interested
in reading the BB.
//Information provided by Robert Stewart//
Oops, you gave credit.
Please give a pointer.
I for one check especially all references to or about the Bible to
see if it really does say that especially in God's Holy UNALTERED & INERRANT
written Word - available in 100s of English Translations.
Anyway, IMHO, all the misinformation & poor opinions of
your quotation have been already debunked on the BB many times.
I see no reason to WRITE MY OWN STUFF AGAIN. Come on -
if it is in print somewhere, we Freedom Readers have already blown up
the untruths, wrong hunches, misinformation, propaganda.
Don't dare tell me ever that my TNIV is other then the UNTARNISHED
INERRANT Written Word of God preserved WITHOUT ERROR for
the 21st Century (2001-2100) (The century I live in).
2 Thessalonians 2:3 (TNIV = Today's New International Version, 2006):
Don't let anyone deceive you in any way,
for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs
and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.
Yep, the 'rebellion' is what I call the pretribulation
Rapture2 (Resurrection1 followed immediately by a Rapture1) of Jesus.
It opens the Tribulation Period (AKA: the Wrath of God) and is
phase one at the beginning of a 7-year-long 'day' of the Lord
(AKA: Day of Christ) called the Tribualtion Period.
But it sure is a lot easier to show in the OLD BIBLES
where 'departure' (or a form of it) is used in the 12
English Bibles preceeding the KJVs and 'falling away'
in the KJVs.
in 2 Thessalonians, the falling away from the faith.
They are falling away from the true Word of God,
and now using corrupted bibles that have the words changed.//
TeeHee.
I have no idea why people copy stuff from other sources (illegal on this board)
That have already oft been copied by other people (who are now
banned for not using BB protocall). I myself have said it before:
The Prime Directive of bb (bullentin boards):
READ BEFORE YOU WRITE.
It will save a lot of repeated errors and grief.
Here is an Old Bible:
2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ,
and by our assembling vnto him,
2 That ye be not suddenly mooued from your minde,
nor troubled neither by spirit, nor by worde, nor by letter,
as it were from vs, as though the day of Christ were at hand.
3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes:
for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first,
and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,
Yep, this Bible (Like the Bishop Bible before it and
the King James Version after it) are written in early MODERN ENGLISH
(not middle English - hardly anybody on this BB can read middle English).
Yep, 2 Thess 2:3 has no mention of 'apostasy' in it.
It is the MVs (Modern Versions of the 20th Century /1901-2000/
that say 'apostasy in them, not the Great Old Bibles
of the 16th-18th Centuries: 16th (1501-1600),
17th (1601-1700), and 18th (1701-1800).
Oh, the Translators of the Geneva Bibles had the English word 'apostasy'
(brought from the Greek) meaning falling from the faith - but they
chose 'departing'. IMHO that means a departing from THE EARTH.
In verse one Paul says He will talk about the 'assembling' conducted
by Jesus - here is where he speaks of it again: in 2 Thess 2:3.
That is the way I believe and I prove it from the KJVs
NOT from the MVs. TeeHee - searching for a Bible that proves
my theory and end up using the KJVs not my MVs.
But anybody could have looked that up, if they were interested
in reading the BB.
//Information provided by Robert Stewart//
Oops, you gave credit.
Please give a pointer.
I for one check especially all references to or about the Bible to
see if it really does say that especially in God's Holy UNALTERED & INERRANT
written Word - available in 100s of English Translations.
Anyway, IMHO, all the misinformation & poor opinions of
your quotation have been already debunked on the BB many times.
I see no reason to WRITE MY OWN STUFF AGAIN. Come on -
if it is in print somewhere, we Freedom Readers have already blown up
the untruths, wrong hunches, misinformation, propaganda.
Don't dare tell me ever that my TNIV is other then the UNTARNISHED
INERRANT Written Word of God preserved WITHOUT ERROR for
the 21st Century (2001-2100) (The century I live in).
2 Thessalonians 2:3 (TNIV = Today's New International Version, 2006):
Don't let anyone deceive you in any way,
for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs
and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.
Yep, the 'rebellion' is what I call the pretribulation
Rapture2 (Resurrection1 followed immediately by a Rapture1) of Jesus.
It opens the Tribulation Period (AKA: the Wrath of God) and is
phase one at the beginning of a 7-year-long 'day' of the Lord
(AKA: Day of Christ) called the Tribualtion Period.
But it sure is a lot easier to show in the OLD BIBLES
where 'departure' (or a form of it) is used in the 12
English Bibles preceeding the KJVs and 'falling away'
in the KJVs.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
exactly the wrong pew
Last edited by a moderator:
Ed Edwards said:
The rapture is post tribulation according to the words of Jesus.
Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Matthew 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
1 Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1 Corinthians 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
[Last Trump] !!!!
The KJV we have today is essentially the same as the 1611 version. There were no revisions; only editions to update the Eglish usage and correct for standardized spelling which happened later. {also to correct some textual mistakes}
Go to scourby.com, and click on
why the KJV is the best at the left side, and read a detailed analysis of why the KJV we have today is really the same as the 1611 version.
The KJV translators were the best linquistic sholars in England from universities, appointed by the king.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Again, I humbly ask, petition, beseech, and pray
you will add the the Translation, Version & Edition.
I am required by God to check out all
scriputre passages.
With 2½-dozen Paper versions and 4-dozen Cyber
versions available to check, this causes me to
sadly waste God's time in my life.
Yes, I know that will mean that you have to edit your
scripture. Your scriputre is right then when you quote it.
Your scripture sounds like the reading of
KJ21 = The 21st Century King James Version
(Deuel Enterprises, 1994)
but some punctuation varies and some
Capitalization varies (Son of Man v. Son of man).
Here is my writing that shows that What Jesus said
here is actually showing the pretribulation rapture2 =
a resurrection1 followed by a rapture1, is
to be in our future.
Here is an earlier writing I wrote which one could
find around the BB several places -- if one
really cared.
--------------------------------
Pretribulation view of Matthew 24:
Here is a pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church,
pre-Millinnial Return of Christ,
Futurist understanding of Matthew 24.
In Matthew 24:3 the disciples of Jesus
ask three questions:
(in the order asked):
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
2. What is the sign of His coming?
3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Jesus answers these questions in
Matthew 24:4-44, then follows them with
some parables in Matthew 24:45 through Matthew 25..
Here are the answers of Jesus in the
order the questions were asked:
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Matthew 24:4-14
2. What is the sign of His coming?
Matthew 24:15-30
3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Matthew 24:31-44
Here is a summary of the answers
in the order in which events will occur
(not in the order in which the questions were asked):
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Soon, it was in 70AD
3. What is the sign of the end of age?
No signs preceeding the end of the age
2. What is the sign of His coming?
The Sign of His coming will be the
Tribulation period.
Recall the Greek language in which this
Mount Olivet Discourse (MOD) was written
did not have Microsoft Word to do it with.
So many ands, buts, and other connectors
give the outline. 'Polysyndeton' is a retorical device that uses
(in English) repeated connectors (usually 'and')
instead of an outline. This is most noticable
in the Bible in Genesis 1 and Matthew 24.
I believe the major outline to be:
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Matthew 24:4-14
2. What is the sign of His coming?
Matthew 24:15-30
3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Matthew 24:31-44
The Gathering in Matthew 24:31 is the
Rapture/resurrection which ends the
current church age (gentile age, age of grace,
last days, etc.)
Thus Matthew 24:4-14 describes all of the
church age even up to this time.
Matthew 24:4-14 describes the church age.
The signs of Matthew 24:4-14 are signs
that the church age continues
NOT that the end is near..
-------------------------------------
Which is a simple and more complete reading
of what Jesus had to say.
As always, feel free to tell me the first verse
after Matthew 24:29 that isn't covered by
the 'after the Tribulation of those days'.
I believe the answer is NOT Matt 24:31
by the above reasons.
Also feel free to explain how Jesus answered these
three questions of the Disciples according to
your post-tribulation a-mill (the Millinnial Messanic
Kingdom of Christ is to be discrned as a Spiritual
truth only) viewpoint.