Your opinion of Billy Graham

billy graham has lost some biblical teachings since he started.

i love listening to him preach though. some good stuff there.

 

So true. Along the way, however, as he entered his latter years, his zeal caused him to endorse just about anything in the hope that somehow people would come to Christ, even if it was through a strange religion. I insert "strange" only for the reader, since from my POV religion is strange, in and of itself, i.e., the RCC. Christianity is not religion, religion being, in and of itself, organized, requiring its followers to observe steps and procedures and rituals and doctrines not found in Christianity.

 

I think Billy Graham is a great example of a good Christian evangelist.

But I saw EWTN (the history section of the Q&A board there) declare boldly that the RCC would be burning Billy Graham at the stake if this was their golden age of the dark ages.

You can't get more honest than that on EWTN!!

 

Since these thoughts and words are not yours, can you tell me what you think of Billy Graham?


Jamie

 

having no knowledge AT ALL you simply insult and slander.

How "odd" that a student of the RCC would DO such a thing!

So let's shed a little light on that dark corner for you.

#1. EWTN is also a web site where there is a history section on the Q&A.
#2. The professof of History that used to manage the Q&A for history on the EWTN web site was doctor Carroll.

Since you are more willing to insult than review facts - maybe I should stop before getting to my question POSTED on the EWTN web site and Dr Carroll's answer.

OR maybe you simply want to "Tell me about it" without reading anything!!

 

Originally Posted by BobRyan
I think Billy Graham is a great example of a good Christian evangelist.

But I saw EWTN (the history section of the Q&A board there) declare boldly that the RCC would be burning Billy Graham at the stake if this was their golden age of the dark ages.

You can't get more honest than that on EWTN!!

 

EWTN Church History Thread --
Torture as endorsed by Pope Innocent and others
Question from Bob on 08-30-2001
Dr. Carroll(The Church has never commended the use of torture in an infallible, EX CATHEDRA statement. )
Thank you that answer it is most helpful. IS this also true of the Bible principles used as arguments for force/torture by the Popes and Councils of the past?
Dr. Caroll{Torture was unfortunately part of court procedure in some cases in the medieval and early modern age. The Church certainly does not favor it now. It was sometimes used in proceedings of the Inquisition, but only those that had been turned over to the government, the "secular arm." This was done because heretics were considered to be (and often were) revolutionaries and so a menace to the security of the state. - Dr. Carroll )
According to Thomas Bokenkotter (pro-Catholic historian and best selling author) the diligent student of Catholic history has some unsavory moments in history to wade through if they want “the whole story” of Catholic intolerance.
In Bokenkotter's book "A Concise History of the Catholic Church" we find this candid remark concerning the inquisition in "Historical Catholic Church" - p117
" "One instrument of PAPAL CONTROL over society that ORIGINATED at this time and that was viewed with much REPUGNANCE in LATER times was the INQUISITION. And it is one of Innocent's (Pope Innocent) less glorious titles to fame that he was the first Pope to apply force on a considerable scale to suppress religious opinions. "
How popular did this free-handed style of torture become among the spiritually elite?
ibid pg 167. Pope Urban VI "turned more violent and savage. Suspecting his OWN Cardinals of plotting against him, he put them to torture and five of them died shortly afterward,"
Other historians have gone on to cite some of the Bible passages used by the church to support the use of force in getting heretics to change their views and accept Catholic doctrine.
My question is whether these Bible arguments are endorsed EX CATHEDRA.
Bob

 

Answer by Warren H. Carroll, Ph.D on 08-30-2001:
Heretica in the Christian centuries were revolutoionaries, every bit as much as Communists in the 20th century. They were a danger to the public order, and consequently had to be firmly suppressed. All the usual apparatus of the criminal law was turned to that purpose. I stand by my original statement on EX CATHEDRA statements.

But What of Bokenkotter’s candid statements about the brutal nature of the history of Catholic intolerance to free thought?

 

Burning of Heretics
Question from on 05-21-2002:

This is very interesting Dr. Carroll. Your post to Leslie Tate on 5-20 is, at the very least, an apologetic for the burning of heretics in the past, and at the worst, a call to burn present day heretics. I note her mentioning of a present day heretic, Billy Graham, and your lack of any kind of distinction between present circumstances and the past. In fact, it seems that you are using the communist movements in China as an example of why the burning of heretics today would be justified.

I find your response disturbing in the extreme. Folks can say what they wish on EWTN's site about Catholic bashing by protestants but I have yet to read of a protestant justifying or calling for the burning of Catholics.
Some extreme posititions advocating the Catholic past I can see and understand but to dismiss so easily the burning of heretics is, in my mind, unconscionable. I don't think that even the Feenyites go that far.

Shawn Madden [email protected]

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 05-23-2002: In a recent post I tried to clarify my position on this issue. I certainly do not advocate the restoration of the butning of heretics, because in the present climate of opinion it would hurt the Church, and I do not think it should have been done in the past, because we should not deliberately inflict such great pain, nor deprive the heretic of the oppotunity to repent. But I do understand why it was done in the past, for the reasons that several posters have stated. Billy Graham would have been seen as a heretic in the past, and he is in fact a heretic now, though he does love Christ and has done much good. - Dr. Carroll

 

Grace and Peace mojoala,

Friend please exercise more Christian charity!

Regardless Peace and God Bless.

 

If the question is what do I think of the man, Billy Graham, I think he is a genuine twice-born believer, who has done his utmost to serve his Lord to the full.

If you mean his organization lately, I think it is one of the most apostate religious organizations on the face of the earth, Numbers are everything, even if it means false or artificial numbers coming forward in public. Then, this is not much different to many evangelical churches to-day going for the "big bang" of showmanship.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I have read some quotes from Mother Theresa which didn't sound christian AT all!

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/mothther.htm

Take a look at this. If these things are true then she was not a christian!
She didn't even try to convert those people which were dying in her house.

(a) "The dying, the crippled, the mentally ill , the unwanted, the unloved--they are Jesus in disguise . ... [through the] poor people I have an opportunity to be 24 hours a day with Jesus." [On another occasion, she again demonstrated her pantheistic religious philosophy: "Every AIDS victim is Jesus in a pitiful disguise; Jesus is in everyone.. ... [AIDS sufferers are] children of God [who] have been created for greater things" (1/13/86 Time ).] (b) "You must make them feel loved and wanted. They are Jesus for me." (c) "I love all religions. ... If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there." [On another occasion, she again demonstrated her false gospel that 'there are many ways to God': "All is God--Buddists, Hindus, Christians, etc., all have access to the same God."]

No one would deny that "Mother" Teresa is doing a marvelous piece of wonderful humanitarian work among the poor and neglected of the world, but what gospel does she preach to them? She is definitely not leading them to the one, true, eternal salvation through the finished sacrifice of Calvary. "Mother" Teresa provides the classic example of compassionate and charitable deeds divorced from truth. She says that her purpose is to bring her patients closer to the "God" in whom they already believe; so that a Hindu becomes a better Hindu, a Buddhist a better Buddhist, etc. (Vatican II says those of all religions are somehow saved through the Church.) She tells how to witness for Jesus: In an interview with a nun who works with "Mother" Teresa (reported in Christian News ), dying Hindus were instructed to pray to their own Hindu gods!:


"These people are waiting to die. What are you telling them to prepare them for death and eternity? She replied candidly, 'We tell them to pray to their Bhagwan, to their gods.'" She was instructing these staunch Hindus to pray sincerely to their own Hindu idols and she felt that if they did this, God would certainly not judge them! No matter how plausible from man's earthly vantage point, when good works are conducted by unregenerate religious people, what is promoted is a cursed false gospel, encouraging the lost heathen to have hope in their false gods, even as they lay upon their death beds. In God's eyes, therefore, the entire endeavor is a cursed one, and no Christian should support, assist, or praise a work cursed by God!


The following is from an interview with a Catholic nun, "Sister" Ann, who worked in Kathmandu, Nepal, with "Mother" Teresa's organization Missionaries of Charity. The interview was conducted 11/23/84 at the Pashupati Temple.


Q: Do you believe if they die believing in Shiva or in Ram [Hindu gods] they will go to heaven?



A: Yes, that is their faith. My own faith will lead me to God, ... So if they have believed in their god very strongly, if they have faith, surely they will be saved.



Q: Today it does not seem that the Catholic Church is trying to convert anymore. I know that John Paul II is saying now that those of other religions are saved. You do not believe they are lost anyway, right?



A: No, they are not lost. They are saved according to their faith, you know. If they believe whatever they believe, that is their salvation.


"Mother" Teresa also participated in the "Summit for Peace" in Assisi, Italy, in November 1986. This blasphemous prayer meeting was arranged by the Pope and was attended by leaders of many different religions, including Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, Shinto, Sikh, and North American Indian--all of whom united in prayers for world peace (11/10/86 Time , pp. 78-79). Biblical Discernment Ministries - Revised 3/96


Yeah....world "peace"....

 

xdisciplex,

The site you quoted is full of lies and distortions. It cannot be trusted. They research nothing they say, they slander folks regularly...

It has absolutely no credibility.

 

You think so?
Maybe you're right. Interesting would be having this interview. Then we could see wether she really said that. But would it be a surprise if she really said this? After all the Pope kissed the quran. Would you kiss the quran? I wouldn't be surprised if Theresa really believed this stuff.

 

That interview with Mother Theresa which was quoted above is from Time Magazine, 12/4/89, pp. 11, 13

I thought I remembered reading it there, but it took a bit for me to find the reference on the web. The reference is listed here, along with the interview itself:
http://www.letusreason.org/Current34.htm

In the meantime, I think Billy Graham’s ecumenistic approach is diluting the Gospel to an extent which is causing a number of people to think they are believers/saved who are not, and they are going to get a nasty surprise later.

Graham is irritating a number of people now. Here is some of what I found.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Devries3.html

http://procinwarn.com/billy.htm

http://www.christianmediaresearch.com/graham.html