Go, Franklin ,Go

Franklin Graham speaks from first hand experience. As the head of the Samaritan's Purse, he has been all around the world to aid all kinds of people who are in desperate need - including those persecuted by Islam. So he knows what he is talking about. And by the way, all it takes is a little common sense to see the truth about Islam but the liberal media cannot (and perhaps refuse to) see truth even if they stumble over it.

 

Barnabas,

Yes it is true that he will be doing good, and preaching the Gospel in the Ecumenical circles. Some will be saved and most will think they are!

For at least us LEGALISTIC BAPTIST (IFB) try to be sure of a persons salvation and not take it for granted. For their enternal security hangs on being sure.

And this is one of the reasons that we can not throw our support behind the Ecumenicals!

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

[ August 14, 2002, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

So, Bro. Justified, you are a pessimist, huh?

 

So, Bro. Justified, you are a pessimist, huh? [/QB][/QUOTE]

AHH! You noticed!

Yes, I am a pessemist on certain issues!

And an optimist on others!

On this issue I am the "P" word. These people listen to these types of speakers and for whatever reason, most of them go back to the churches they came from feeling good, or end up going back the the church they haven't been in, in years!

But, the sad thing, a lot of these people never heard the plan of salvation and if they did, never got saved.

Nobody there to do follow up, and to be sure they got saved or able to answer their questions properly from the Bible.

As anyone can see, this is very dangerous ground to stand on.

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

[ August 14, 2002, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

Hey, Bro. Justified, didn't we get off the subject a wee bit here? The way I see it, Franklin Graham was not preaching here, but was interviewed by a secular media and his answers came right out of his heart about Islam. If we address different issues here, such as Billy Graham and the effectiveness of his ministry, then we are getting off the subject and we should open another thread which will specifically address those issues. I think, on this thread, we should stay on course and not talk about apples, when we really should talk about oranges - OK?

[ August 14, 2002, 10:24 PM: Message edited by: Barnabas ]

 

Barnabas,

It also has to do with association.

You know! Lay down with dogs, wake up with fleas!

Open the sewer cover enough times, you start stinkin like it!

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

 

Justified, the association game does not apply in this case. It is still apples and oranges. As I said, we can discuss this on another thread, but if we do it here we'll find ourself going off on a different tangent.

[ August 16, 2002, 11:33 AM: Message edited by: Barnabas ]

 

I have never been to one of his meetings, however, after watching him "preach" on Fox News the other night, I can't help but support the man. Every question he was asked was answered with the plan of salvation. Also, his stand, even risking becoming unpopular (as most "political" preachers would not do)by preaching against other religeons turns me on. . . but like I said never been to a meeting, and don't know him personally. I've been snowballed before.

 

William F. Buckley, Jr., wrote an article called "Are We Owed An Apology?" about Franklin Graham. Here is part of what Mr. Buckley wrote:

"If a band of Americans, proclaiming their devotion to the faith, assaulted a Muslim center, we would not need to wait very long for disavowals by Christian leaders. When John Brown carried his faith to unreasonable lengths, we hanged him. What we are waiting for, says Dr. Graham, is an apology from Muslim leaders. Why shouldn't we have that -- an explicit disavowal, as contrary to acceptable teachings of the Koran, of the acts of the terrorists?

What we have is denunciations of Dr. Graham for admitting the hypothetical possibility that the Sept. 11 actors were credible Muslims. Dr. Faiz Rehman, who is communications director for the American Muslim Council, says that Dr. Graham "is sounding like a broken record." But the silence of the sovereign Muslim community is sounding like unbroken muteness. If the position of the American Muslim Council is that it is humiliating even to speculate that the killers had a root in Islam, they should tell us what it is they plan to do about those in the Muslim world who applaud the terrorists' acts and their mission."

The total article is at www.townhall.com where one clicks on "columnists" or www.nationalreview.com where one clicks on regulars. In both cases click on William F. Buckley, Jr. The article is dated August 16, 2002, I think. (I have edited this three times.)

God's Richest Blessings To You And Yours!

[ August 19, 2002, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: nom-de-cyber guy ]

 

When he denounces Ecumenicalism and the promotion of the liberal Gospel is turned away from, then I wil support him!

Right now his association is with his father and his association with the ecumenical movement!

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

 

Justified, forgive me for saying this but you sound like a broken record, and yet you have failed to address the issue. I have recommended to you to open another thread and discuss the issues you are hollering about and then you'll be right on target.

 

This thread says "Go Franklin Go" and we have Baptist supporting him. He may have good to say and even do good, but he still pushes the ecumenical movement just like his dad.

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

 

Yep, a broken record it is.

 

ok.. you may think this is a stupid question, but what exactly is ecumenical??

 

Thanks to Mr. Barnabas!

This issue deals with the nature of Islam, as William F. Buckley, Jr., wrote in his article (and as others pointed out on this board). The question is what is the nature of Islam? Is Islam a religion of hatred for non-Islamics and war and violence against non-Islamics? Or is Islam not of a demonic origin?

Why does Islam have this long period of "unbroken muteness" about what happened to the USA on Nine Eleven?

My fellow Americans, God Bless You and God Bless America!

 

A simplistic explanation is the bringing together under one roof all different religious beliefs.

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

[ August 22, 2002, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

Thank you for clarifying that for us Bro. Justified. So, you do agree that Franklin Graham was not willing to bring together under one roof the religion of Islam, but exposed it for what it stand?

nom-de-cyber guy, I do appreciate your on-target remarks. Thank you!

 

Yes, he is not. But ecumenicalism doesn't only pertain to all religions, but can and does refer to those who would try to bring all and/or some of the different so called Christian under the same umbrella. And this is what I'm talking about with Franklin.

”Conservatives- Theology dictates morality/Liberals- morality dictates Theology” Justified Version

 

Bro. Justified, after all this lengthy discussion you are still beating at the same dead horse? For the subject of this thread is not about ecumenism or association therewith but about the brave notion of standing up against and denouncing Islam as a peaceful religion. And, my friend, that is the whole point here - nothing else.