Dr. Graham preached the exclusive gospel of Christ but is heavily criticized for his personal inclusivism view of salvation for those who sincerely believed in God but had not heard the gospel. McCall magazine interview January 1978 for example.
Announcement
Collapse
General Theistics 101 Guidelines
This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Opinions on Billy Graham
Collapse
X
-
. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostNot having an affair does not prevent somebody from accusing you of doing so, and it happens a lot. Lose-lose
Seriously...I'm not saying that a person, male or female, should not take precautions if they are dealing with someone where they think there is a likely problem. Most of us can see them coming a mile away. We used to call them "vocation busters" and they came in both genders.
What I AM saying is that a policy that paints all women with the same brush, based solely on their gender and the fear of being accused, is simply discriminatory and unjust. In a spirit of "fear of what might be said," I treat all women as if they are some form of pariah that needs to be kept at hands-length or supervised, or it treats all women as "someone I may not be able to resist myself around." It's a sad commentary on not only society - but also the person who feels compelled to live that philosophy. It doesn't say a great deal about their confidence in, or respect for, their fellow human beings.
In this discussion - I have been accused of being "uncharitable." In reality, if you think about what prompts this philosohy, it is that philosophy that is uncharitable.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostIf you cannot stand the heat...
Seriously...I'm not saying that a person, male or female, should not take precautions if they are dealing with someone where they think there is a likely problem. Most of us can see them coming a mile away. We used to call them "vocation busters" and they came in both genders.
What I AM saying is that a policy that paints all women with the same brush, based solely on their gender and the fear of being accused, is simply discriminatory and unjust. In a spirit of "fear of what might be said," I treat all women as if they are some form of pariah that needs to be kept at hands-length or supervised, or it treats all women as "someone I may not be able to resist myself around." It's a sad commentary on not only society - but also the person who feels compelled to live that philosophy. It doesn't say a great deal about their confidence in, or respect for, their fellow human beings.
In this discussion - I have been accused of being "uncharitable." In reality, if you think about what prompts this philosohy, it is that philosophy that is uncharitable.
Edit: and as for being uncharitable, yeah, I think the bolded clears that up pretty well.Last edited by Zymologist; 02-21-2018, 04:11 PM.I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostIf you cannot stand the heat...
Seriously...I'm not saying that a person, male or female, should not take precautions if they are dealing with someone where they think there is a likely problem. Most of us can see them coming a mile away. We used to call them "vocation busters" and they came in both genders.
What I AM saying is that a policy that paints all women with the same brush, based solely on their gender and the fear of being accused, is simply discriminatory and unjust. In a spirit of "fear of what might be said," I treat all women as if they are some form of pariah that needs to be kept at hands-length or supervised, or it treats all women as "someone I may not be able to resist myself around." It's a sad commentary on not only society - but also the person who feels compelled to live that philosophy. It doesn't say a great deal about their confidence in, or respect for, their fellow human beings.
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostIf you cannot stand the heat...
Seriously...I'm not saying that a person, male or female, should not take precautions if they are dealing with someone where they think there is a likely problem. Most of us can see them coming a mile away. We used to call them "vocation busters" and they came in both genders.
What I AM saying is that a policy that paints all women with the same brush, based solely on their gender and the fear of being accused, is simply discriminatory and unjust. In a spirit of "fear of what might be said," I treat all women as if they are some form of pariah that needs to be kept at hands-length or supervised, or it treats all women as "someone I may not be able to resist myself around." It's a sad commentary on not only society - but also the person who feels compelled to live that philosophy. It doesn't say a great deal about their confidence in, or respect for, their fellow human beings.
In this discussion - I have been accused of being "uncharitable." In reality, if you think about what prompts this philosohy, it is that philosophy that is uncharitable.
Next?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostYou're wrong. It's not discriminatory nor unjust. It's used by both men and women in ministry towards the opposite sex. It's not based on a spirit of fear, it's based on being wise as serpents and innocent as doves. It isn't treating all women as pariahs, it's offering people the respect they deserve, and making it known that you expect the same back. You've twisted the whole thing in your head the opposite of what it was intended for. It's not a sad commentary on our society, it's acknowledging that people are sinful by nature, and that accountability should be in place between as it is in so many other places within and without the church. You're calling something that's good, evil, and you're completely off base in your accusations that it's says something negative about a church's belief in the confidence or respect of their fellow human beings. You're just wrong, carpedm, and that's it.
This policy honors my wife.
*a friendly dig at Carpe, who, quite honestly, I think is more "left" than he likes to think he is or presents himself to be.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostYou're wrong. It's not discriminatory nor unjust. It's used by both men and women in ministry towards the opposite sex. It's not based on a spirit of fear, it's based on being wise as serpents and innocent as doves. It isn't treating all women as pariahs, it's offering people the respect they deserve, and making it known that you expect the same back. You've twisted the whole thing in your head the opposite of what it was intended for. It's not a sad commentary on our society, it's acknowledging that people are sinful by nature, and that accountability should be in place as it is in so many other places within and without the church. You're calling something that's good, evil, and you're completely off base in your accusations that it's says something negative about a church's belief in the confidence or respect of their fellow human beings. You're just wrong, carpedm, and that's it.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostIt's part of why I've been happily married for over 42 years, have had ZERO scandals (and only two potential scandals which were quickly nipped in the bud, thanks to said policy), and my wife thinks the policy is good common sense. I care far more about what SHE thinks than some leftist internet poster* who claims to be a moderate!
This policy honors my wife.
*a friendly dig at Carpe, who, quite honestly, I think is more "left" than he likes to think he is or presents himself to be.
But you have the right to be wrong about this... so carry onThe ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostDig accepted! And I'm sure it honors your wife. It just doesn't honor anyone else...IMO
But you have the right to be wrong about this... so carry onThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zymologist View PostWhy not?
And with all due respect to CP, if his 42-year marriage (Which is awesome! Working on 31 myself) is due to this rule...something is wrong.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostIt honors the Lord.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI'm far more concerned about honoring God than I am you.
But what do I know - I'm a heathen that is 97.3% wrongThe ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostThe man is basically saying, "Gee, I cannot be around a woman who's not my wife! What would people think?" That makes the other women basically sexual objects that, apparently, the person either cannot control themselves around, or thinks other people will think they cannot control themselves around.
In a business - it means a male boss cannot have a personnel review meeting with female subordinates, for no other reason than "they're female."
IMO, it's a ridiculous, and potentially harmful rule. I don't find it uplifting in the least. I find it degrading to the women is objectifies, and a pretty sad commentary on the people who feel they need to follow it.
That's why he was adamant about having his crusades publicly audited so there was no whiff of scandal. And what I would say is behind the Graham Rule as well.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostAnd with all due respect to CP, if his 42-year marriage (Which is awesome! Working on 31 myself) is due to this rule...something is wrong.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostIt's part of why I've been happily married for over 42 years, have had ZERO scandals (and only two potential scandals which were quickly nipped in the bud, thanks to said policy), and my wife thinks the policy is good common sense. I care far more about what SHE thinks than some leftist internet poster* who claims to be a moderate!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Esther, 11-23-2023, 10:29 AM
|
184 responses
855 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 05-09-2024, 07:07 AM |
Comment