Based on public statements over the years, it appears Franklin Graham is not half the man his father is/was. Franklin made several bigoted remarks about Mohammad and the Muslim religion a few years ago. He is a much more ideological evangelical, willing to exploit culture wars for his own political gain, than his father ever was. Billy Graham was certainly conservative, but he never failed to recognize the power of an ecumenical tone in bringing peace between followers of different faiths. Hopefully Franklin Graham has matured in the last few years and has migrated away from the hateful tone of the Falwell/Robertson crowd.

I went to the 1970 Crusade too. Then left in handcuffs.

Graham is a spiritual carpetbagger.

Until we all get over this God nonsense, there will always be holy snake-oil salesman to show up and bless the bombs before they fly.

I was there but I don't remember much. Just a huge crowd and a very boring experience. I don't remember seeing Instapunk's dad's bunch. If I could re-live it now, I'm sure I would cheer them on and blood would boil over Nixon's speech and the religious sanctioning of one of the most amoral and corrupt administrations.

My family also saw Nixon at the Coliseum, I believe in '68. He walked across the street in front amidst a huge crowd. I reached in and managed to touch him on the shoulder. Now I question whether that really happened, it sounds so weird, but I remember it that way. (Of course, then he went on to do all those bad things. I ruined history!! The humanity!!!)

Wonder if anyone would show up to protest?
Well, if I can get loose from work, maybe...

What I love about families like the Grahams is, no matter how good or bad we may feel them to be, their blood will warm the throats of the old ones no less than that of us heathens.

So... don't look for me down front after the "call"...

Anybody know when the Dalai Lama is coming anywhere near?

their blood will warm the throats of the old ones no less than that of us heathens

Am I the only one here who wonders what the hell this means? Why are we bleeding on old ones?

he's the greatest Christian evangelist of our time

In my book, that's damning with faint praise.

he's the greatest Christian evangelist of our time

That's only because Marjoe Gortner came out.

I have no use at all for preachers of any religion that grow fat with wealth from their congregations. They live in big fancy houses, and wear designer clothes and eat gourmet meals while too many people go to sleep in a cardboard box, and wear rags, and eat from dumpsters.

If they cannot follow the tenets of the man they supposedly are trying to bring people to...i.e. Jesus Christ who said:

Matthew 19:21
Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

and this:

Mark 10:21
Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

Then they have no business preaching to or at or about anyone.

_____________________________________________________
"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"
"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali

Jesus opposed the extravigant lifestyles of
religious leaders as much as anybody (probably more), but what do you suppose "follow me" meant? I'm guessing he taught the former is pretty useless without the latter.

I have no use at all for preachers of any religion that grow fat with wealth from their congregations. They live in big fancy houses, and wear designer clothes and eat gourmet meals

While this may apply to some preachers, it would not apply to Billy Graham. Sadly, most preachers live a modest lifestyle and do good things. They get tarnished by the exceptions to their profession.

Pastor in Chief
(link...)

From a Couple Years Back
(link...)

Sure is trendy to bash a Christian at any drop of the hat, but the problem you have in pointing out failures of the Church is that Christians admit their failures, with the goal of getting better all the time. As long as we're dropping quotations," ...for there is no distinction; for all have fallen short of the glory of God... Romans 21,22-23. And in spite of these shorcomings and obnoxious, often huckster tv preachers, the fact remains that gifts by Americans who consider themselves religious is always the greatest source of charitable donations.

Thanks for that brief interlude. Now, back to the Baptist Bashing...

Sure is trendy to bash a Christian at any drop of the hat,

Where is this trend (other than this thread, maybe)? The only trend I see is for people to brag about how much of a Christian s/he is, and to excuse every transgression and credit every accomplishment to their Christian faith. Athletes and politicians especially.

...that Christians admit their failures, with the goal of getting better all the time.

Just as valid: Many prominent (faux) Christians and those who make the most talk of being Christians (Republicans especially) admit the fewest failures, violate the most commandments, and are the least humble.

And claiming to have a goal without exhibiting any effort toward achieving one is no virtue.

I don't bash Christians...Never have. In fact...I hope to meet one some day.

(yeah, stole that from H.L. Menken)

Actually, I have a certain respect for Billy Graham. He seems to have always had a reasonable approach to how people should get along. I don't buy into the supernatural hokum, is all.

How many would you say you have violated?

Why do you ask?

Since admitting failures, violating fewer
commandments, and being more humble are desirable virtues, it seems only right to examine ourselves also. Then we can better determine who has violated "the most" and what, if any consequences there are (or should be) for that.

I meant virtues of Christianity. There are good reasons for everyone to follow some of the commandments, but not all of them apply to agnostics.

Thanks for pointing out that error, though. I of course meant violating commandments most frequently, not the most commandments. It would be silly to gauge that! Good catch. Sorry for the sloppiness.

Of the commandments I do violate, I violate most of them fairly frequently, but then, they aren't my laws. Asking christians to abide by their own laws is not the same as asking nonbelievers to do so. Nonbelievers on the other hand are more than welcome to share when we find believers acting in ways that violate the moral code they all too often ask us all to live up/down to.

Christianity is not merely some set of rules in a book. Christians speak to ideals and beliefs based on the Bible and their faith. It doesn't mean they always live up to those. I certainly don't. Christians do sin. To quote the simplistic bumper sticker, 'Christians Aren't Perfect, Just Forgiven'. Christianity is a relationship with God which exists in this life and beyond this life. People are certainly free not to believe. But, the fact that Christians sin and sometimes don't live up to the ideals they themselves espouse is not a good reason.

I often wish God had perfect messengers, but only one of those has ever walked the earth. As it is, preaching the gospel is left to imperfect people. I'm thankful one of those imperfect people is coming to Knoxville. If you have a chance, I hope you give him a listen.

I often wish God had perfect messengers, but only one of those has ever walked the earth.

This illustrates it's own fallacy. It may be something you believe but it may or may not be true. Had there been a perfect messenger the message would be perfect and impossible to not believe.

I personally think that stating a belief as a fact is in itself a violation of the "false witness" commandment...but I forgive you.

I wish I had time to interpret all that this morning.

Sammy stated my point better than I did. My second sentence would have been better put as, "There are good reasons for everyone to follow some of the commandments, but not all of them apply to agnostics." As usual, I erred on the side of too many words.

I like Steve's comments too.

There are good reasons for everyone to follow some of the commandments, but not all of them

I agree totally. There's overlap with other religion's laws which seem to smooth out relations in a community. Coming to an agreement that we won't kill each other, steal each other's stuff, lie to each other...that seems fair.

But the fact that the commandments got broken up and sent to rewrite has always been suspicious to me. I consider the disappearing commandment, "thy shalt not seethe a calf in its mother's milk," to be one of the not so hidden messages in the bible.

Every government law that is made legislates someones morality. Someone is deciding what should be allowed or not allowed based on what they "believe" is right for the "good" of the people.
Although the word "believe" seems to be used to often in the wrong context. Some things are true whether we believe them or not. You can say "I don't believe in trucks" & then go out and stand the middle of the interstate. My lack of belief will not stop them from coming. Some truth is truth because it is. (Assuming we agree on what the definition of "is" is). You can't lessen God's existance by not believing & I am not doing Him a favor by believing. He is what He is. The Ten Commandments is the truck we don't want to face because we don't want to feel the impact. So we stay far away from the road claiming to deny their existance.

"He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces. He on whom it falls will be crushed."

There ar consequences for defying both.

"He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces. He on whom it falls will be crushed."

Coop, you misuse the term "believe" in your comment on law. This is a fundamental mistake made by any number of legislators, so don't feel like I'm picking on you.

No law should ever be based on "believe"...It should be based on "discern".

Someone is deciding what should be allowed or not allowed based on what they "believe" is right for the "good" of the people.

The slow pitch crosses the plate:

Conventionality is not morality. Self-righteousness is not religion. To attack the first is not to assail the last. To pluck the mask from the face of the Pharisee, is not to lift an impious hand to the Crown of Thorns. These things and deeds are diametrically opposed: they are as distinct as is vice from virtue.

Men too often confound them: they should not be confounded: appearance should not be mistaken for truth; narrow human doctrines, that only tend to elate and magnify a few, should not be substituted for the world-redeeming creed of Christ. There is — I repeat it — a difference; and it is a good, and not a bad action to mark broadly and clearly the line of separation between them.

I won't disagree with you as far as replacing the term "belief" with "discern" when it comes to the government making laws. I'm not sure if that alters my point about legislating morality though. That may not have been what you were referring to.
Thanks, I don't think you were picking on me, in fact, compared to some of the earlier entries, that was refreshingly respectful.

"He who falls on this stone will be
broken to pieces. He on whom it falls will be crushed."

It's a quote. I'll leave it to you to "discern" what he meant.

Sven, that's some good stuff you wrote there. Tell me though, are you agreeing with me? Disagreeing? Or did you just want to write some good stuff?

I thought it was the Internet that isn't a truck?

Does that mean God is the Internet?

Theology's so durn confusing ...

The only evidence I have is the most copied, studied, & translated book in the history of the world. People have accepted some things as true on a lot less than that.

Without question, many on this board accept many "truths" about the Bush Administration based on far less examination than the Bible has endured.

Without question, many on this board accept many "truths" about the Bush Administration.....

An example

Wearybottom Associates

I hope CBT doesn't mind if I pull his Bush out.

many on this board accept many "truths" based on far less examination than the Bible has endured

The Bible has stood the examination because those who believe the Bible refuse to believe what others have to say about it. We could very easily pick the Bible to pieces and find that, in the end, it doesn't stand up to a standard many people expect out of sources of truth.

An interesting note I heard at church yesterday. Most of you have heard of the huge upset by Appy State over Michigan a week ago. The young man who blocked the final kick by Michigan to insure the win is Corey Lynch. I'm sure there were lots of prayers being said for Corey, given his fiance' is Sissy Graham, daughter of Franklin Graham and granddaughter of Billy Graham.

(link...)

And before some of you try to find fault and complain that these Christians must have been praying for Michigan to lose, I'm sure the prayers were that Corey and the other players would play their best. I'm likewise sure there were lots of friends and families saying prayers for this Michigan players. I know God cares about every player. I don't believe He is primarily concerned with who wins.

Somebody, anybody, kindly kick my wrinkled old as backside if you ever catch me praying for a prize as asinine as the outcome of a football game.

'Pookie' Adams: Some people guzzle God like He was a keg of beer.

Wearybottom Associates

Funny how those prayers go up in times of pressure or crisis even before we realize we are doing it. It's almost like our spirit (or conscience) knows even if our mind doesn't.
Burp!

Coop, I used to compete on a fairly high level and noticed others praying and crossing themselves and things like that before the start.

Me? I would close my eyes and meditate on visualizing the race and having fun. I figured the person who trained the best and had the talent was going to win, and weren't those other guys asking for something they may not have prepared properly for? I figured it was about testing yourself against your own limits.

Why ask a god for something you haven't earned and don't deserve?

Anyway, I keep hoping this thread will just fade away and we can get back to something that matters.

I am not promoting prayer to win games. I used to compete also, although it may be debatable on what level (Although I can still be a pretty mean ping pong player). I think I probably did pray & try to make deals with God & plenty of other stange things hoping I could pull a win out of my hat. I don't think I ever won anything because I was more spiritual than someone else or lost because someone was more spiritual than me (unless it was because it helped them calm down & stay under control). If they beat me it was because they were better than me.
I was just noting where many peoples minds go first under pressure, even if their goal is misguided.

Prayer for me isn't, "help me win," so much as be with me so that I can be focused and present. But then I'm a heratic Episcopalian.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut