Billy Graham

[Grace Valerie Claire]

1 hour ago, chockfull said:

Sure - so after research, here are some sources:

http://www.nickiswift.com/100872/untold-truth-billy-graham/

http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot.com/2018/02/why-billy-graham-gets-c.html

https://eatapeckofdirt.com/2018/02/22/billy-graham-is-dead-god-save-america-from-false-prophets-amen/

Major criticism summary:

1. Anti-semitic

2. Chose politics over genuine evangelism message - even according to him.  He courted the Presidents.

3. Succession - Franklin has issues.

 

Where I do see the major difference between Billy and Victor Paul Wierwille is that Billy was not a drunken adulterer and plagiarist.  I see no accounts of him obtaining a "sex motor coach" and traveling around the country.  He notoriously would not be alone with a woman not his wife.

 

But sure he had other issues.  So does the empire run by his son.

GS, I think Franklin and his sister Anne are Garbage!  I think both of them are in "the family business", for the money.  I think both of them are sick, creepy people! 

[chockfull]

1 minute ago, GoldStar said:

Thanks Chockfull, I wish I had your confidence in order to make statements similar to those, but my thinking is that multi-millions of dollars can hide many things as we all know by now

But the "there's worse about him" that I mentioned previously has not been touched on by any comments here, I may post the source I have already but was waiting till I found a more complete source of proof, but research takes time

What could this have to do with it?: "their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage."

I have no statistical levels of confidence.  "A 95% condidence interval" LOL.  

In that one category of life - sexual indiscretions - of course nobody will never know everything about another.  But if you combine the recent #MeToo movement with Billy's moral claims in that category I would just point out that Billy Graham wasn't going to be fired from his denomination for an affair with his secretary, and does not have multiple credible accounts of getting underage girls drunk and taking advantages of them on his record like Victor Paul Wierwille does.  Actually, in spite of all Billy's corruption, which I would probably classify under pandering to politicians for personal or organizational advantage, unless you have something more for me, I would list the following things as known about Victor Paul Wierwille in the sexual predator category that absolutely have no parallel in Billy Graham s life and Christian example.:

• attended hippee gatherings to participate in free sex outside of marriage
• chronic adulterer - proven by story after story
• had a motor coach where supplied young and possibly underaged women with alcohol and had sex with them
• board of trustees would commonly pass women around for sexual use
• admitted and chronicled lawsuit accounts of not only adultery but quid pro quo sexual harassment, including people sleeping with VPW and LCM for political favor.

So those are the known things about the Way and its leadership.

I think I am pretty safe in drawing a contrast with how Billy Graham lived his life.  Especially in these categories of not being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer.

 

[chockfull]

5 hours ago, Grace Valerie Claire said:

GS, I think Franklin and his sister Anne are Garbage!  I think both of them are in "the family business", for the money.  I think both of them are sick, creepy people! 

They've picked up the worst traits of their father - pandering to power.

[Grace Valerie Claire]

51 minutes ago, chockfull said:

They've picked up the worst traits of their father - pandering to power.

Chock, bingo!!

[GoldStar]

5 hours ago, chockfull said:

I think I am pretty safe in drawing a contrast with how Billy Graham lived his life.  Especially in these categories of not being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer.

Chockfull, if you had been with him 24 hours a day for years, I would say that you would be pretty safe in drawing that contrast, otherswise, it is pure speculation

But even if it were true that BG was always faithful to his wife (an admirable thing), there is evidence that he was involved in other things that are much worse than being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer, but no one has mentioned the worse things in this thread as far as I know, and I am not satisfied with the source I have, so I am waiting to find a more definitive source or at least multiple corroborating sources before I post it

[So_crates]

1 hour ago, GoldStar said:

there is evidence that he was involved in other things that are much worse than being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer, but no one has mentioned the worse things in this thread as far as I know, and I am not satisfied with the source I have, so I am waiting to find a more definitive source or at least multiple corroborating sources before I post it

So, help me out here:

You don't trust your source.

Yet you believe the information your source provides. (or, at least, believe the info enough to keeping hinting at it in a desire to pass it along.)

Your belief in the information is based on...??

Edited March 6, 2018 by So_crates

[Rocky]

1 hour ago, GoldStar said:

Chockfull, if you had been with him 24 hours a day for years, I would say that you would be pretty safe in drawing that contrast, otherswise, it is pure speculation

But even if it were true that BG was always faithful to his wife (an admirable thing), there is evidence that he was involved in other things that are much worse than being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer, but no one has mentioned the worse things in this thread as far as I know, and I am not satisfied with the source I have, so I am waiting to find a more definitive source or at least multiple corroborating sources before I post it

Sin is sin. Yours is almost certainly not any worse than mine. There are only degrees in human perception thereof. From that perspective, Graham was a sinner, so are you and I.

[modcat5]

Gentlepeople:

Stick to the topic.

COME ON!

[modcat5]

For the record, GoldStar is not the only one whose posts are being hidden (not deleted... moderators tend to leave these posts visible to each other so that if we disagree, we can discuss and decide whether to restore them. This transparency minute brought to you by Saran Wrap).

Quite simply, if you're not talking about Billy Graham, your post got hidden, just like I said it would.

 

Socrates: your "Ruffles" post is not exactly called for. We left it up, I think, because it makes a good point. You could have been a little nicer about it. Yeah, like I'm never guilty of THAT. But still. 

GS: I am talking to one of the other moderators and trying to get up to speed on all that's been taking place here. I want you to feel welcome to speak your mind while remembering that the person receiving your message is a person. Challenging the basis of your opinions is fair game. Attacking you personally is not. Sometimes we need to figure out the difference. (Personally, I think the Ruffles thing was a bit much). We can discuss offline (private messages), but I wanted to say a few things publicly, partly for clarity, partly for transparency, and partly so that I say the same things privately that I say publicly.

I'm not any more in charge than any other moderator except Pawtucket, but he's busy usually. Moderators tend to feel better when we know we are like-minded. I feel like showering after I said that. But it's true: we like agreeing with each other, but we're often busy.

Now, one more time: THIS THREAD IS ABOUT BILLY GRAHAM.

You CAN write a post that doesn't mention him and still be on topic (I recognize that, or more posts would be deleted), but it's VERY easy to get off topic that way. So try not to do it.

[So_crates]

9 minutes ago, modcat5 said:

For the record, GoldStar is not the only one whose posts are being hidden (not deleted... moderators tend to leave these posts visible to each other so that if we disagree, we can discuss and decide whether to restore them. This transparency minute brought to you by Saran Wrap).

Quite simply, if you're not talking about Billy Graham, your post got hidden, just like I said it would.

 

Socrates: your "Ruffles" post is not exactly called for. We left it up, I think, because it makes a good point. You could have been a little nicer about it. Yeah, like I'm never guilty of THAT. But still. 

GS: I am talking to one of the other moderators and trying to get up to speed on all that's been taking place here. I want you to feel welcome to speak your mind while remembering that the person receiving your message is a person. Challenging the basis of your opinions is fair game. Attacking you personally is not. Sometimes we need to figure out the difference. (Personally, I think the Ruffles thing was a bit much). We can discuss offline (private messages), but I wanted to say a few things publicly, partly for clarity, partly for transparency, and partly so that I say the same things privately that I say publicly.

I'm not any more in charge than any other moderator except Pawtucket, but he's busy usually. Moderators tend to feel better when we know we are like-minded. I feel like showering after I said that. But it's true: we like agreeing with each other, but we're often busy.

Now, one more time: THIS THREAD IS ABOUT BILLY GRAHAM.

You CAN write a post that doesn't mention him and still be on topic (I recognize that, or more posts would be deleted), but it's VERY easy to get off topic that way. So try not to do it.

Modcat5,

I apologize for using this method to contact you. I would have sent you a PM, but my PM function hasn't worked since I returned. 

First off, allow me to apologize to the mods for my part in this. I can see where I was wrong and will endevour to do better in the future.

Second, if you would like to delete the Ruffles paragraph, feel free to do so.

If you would like to delete this post, as its not on topic, feel free to do so.

Thanks to all the mods for their patience. 

[Rocky]

16 minutes ago, modcat5 said:

GS: I am talking to one of the other moderators and trying to get up to speed on all that's been taking place here. I want you to feel welcome to speak your mind while remembering that the person receiving your message is a person. Challenging the basis of your opinions is fair game. Attacking you personally is not. Sometimes we need to figure out the difference.

Excellent point.

[modcat5]

It's a fine line between moderating and micromanaging. I'd like to keep Ruffles up just for the sake of an example we can all see.

Speaking for myself, apologies aren't necessary, I don't think.

But I'm confident my fellow active mods (hahahahahahahahaha I used the plural, as if, hahahahha) are reading along. If they felt an apology was in order the post would be gone. That leaves GS to accept if he (assuming he) is so inclined.

 

Be excellent to each other.

[Taxidev]

On 2/24/2018 at 11:12 PM, waysider said:

Rolling Stone had THIS article.

I found it interesting.

Harry Truman was astute.  It says in the bible to be wary of fair speeches.  

Rom 16:17  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 
Rom 16:18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

I was wary of Graham for quite a while, intensified when, after the world trade center slaughter, he was asked why this would happen, and he said he didn't know.  Not a response I would have expected from a man of God.

A bit off topic, but I found it so interesting that the attack occurred on September 11.  We do all know what that is, yes?

Edited March 7, 2018 by Taxidev

[waysider]

47 minutes ago, Taxidev said:

A bit off topic, but I found it so interesting that the attack occurred on September 11.  We do all know what that is, yes?

I see you point but I don't think terrorists are driven by irony. I think they simply seize on opportunity as it presents itself.

OK... Back To discussing Billy Graham

[chockfull]

16 hours ago, modcat5 said:

Quite simply, if you're not talking about Billy Graham, your post got hidden, just like I said it would.

Billy, Billy, Billy, Billy Whoops, Billy, Whoops, Billy, Billy, Billy.

Has a certain cadence to it.

[Grace Valerie Claire]

On 3/5/2018 at 4:50 PM, chockfull said:

I have no statistical levels of confidence.  "A 95% condidence interval" LOL.  

In that one category of life - sexual indiscretions - of course nobody will never know everything about another.  But if you combine the recent #MeToo movement with Billy's moral claims in that category I would just point out that Billy Graham wasn't going to be fired from his denomination for an affair with his secretary, and does not have multiple credible accounts of getting underage girls drunk and taking advantages of them on his record like Victor Paul Wierwille does.  Actually, in spite of all Billy's corruption, which I would probably classify under pandering to politicians for personal or organizational advantage, unless you have something more for me, I would list the following things as known about Victor Paul Wierwille in the sexual predator category that absolutely have no parallel in Billy Graham s life and Christian example.:

• attended hippee gatherings to participate in free sex outside of marriage
• chronic adulterer - proven by story after story
• had a motor coach where supplied young and possibly underaged women with alcohol and had sex with them
• board of trustees would commonly pass women around for sexual use
• admitted and chronicled lawsuit accounts of not only adultery but quid pro quo sexual harassment, including people sleeping with VPW and LCM for political favor.

So those are the known things about the Way and its leadership.

I think I am pretty safe in drawing a contrast with how Billy Graham lived his life.  Especially in these categories of not being a plagiarizing drunkard adulterer.

 

Chock, good post! But now that BG is dead, I wonder who will lead his ministry?  His son Franklin?

[Grace Valerie Claire]

3 hours ago, Taxidev said:

Harry Truman was astute.  It says in the bible to be wary of fair speeches.  

Rom 16:17  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 
Rom 16:18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

I was wary of Graham for quite a while, intensified when, after the world trade center slaughter, he was asked why this would happen, and he said he didn't know.  Not a response I would have expected from a man of God.

A bit off topic, but I found it so interesting that the attack occurred on September 11.  We do all know what that is, yes?

Taxi, I think HST knew Bullszzt when he heard it.  Good for him!

[Grace Valerie Claire]

18 hours ago, modcat5 said:

For the record, GoldStar is not the only one whose posts are being hidden (not deleted... moderators tend to leave these posts visible to each other so that if we disagree, we can discuss and decide whether to restore them. This transparency minute brought to you by Saran Wrap).

Quite simply, if you're not talking about Billy Graham, your post got hidden, just like I said it would.

 

Socrates: your "Ruffles" post is not exactly called for. We left it up, I think, because it makes a good point. You could have been a little nicer about it. Yeah, like I'm never guilty of THAT. But still. 

GS: I am talking to one of the other moderators and trying to get up to speed on all that's been taking place here. I want you to feel welcome to speak your mind while remembering that the person receiving your message is a person. Challenging the basis of your opinions is fair game. Attacking you personally is not. Sometimes we need to figure out the difference. (Personally, I think the Ruffles thing was a bit much). We can discuss offline (private messages), but I wanted to say a few things publicly, partly for clarity, partly for transparency, and partly so that I say the same things privately that I say publicly.

I'm not any more in charge than any other moderator except Pawtucket, but he's busy usually. Moderators tend to feel better when we know we are like-minded. I feel like showering after I said that. But it's true: we like agreeing with each other, but we're often busy.

Now, one more time: THIS THREAD IS ABOUT BILLY GRAHAM.

You CAN write a post that doesn't mention him and still be on topic (I recognize that, or more posts would be deleted), but it's VERY easy to get off topic that way. So try not to do it.

Modcat, is that what he was posting about??  I thought he was talking about potato chips!  Can you tell I am on a diet??!!

[chockfull]

12 hours ago, Grace Valerie Claire said:

Chock, good post! But now that BG is dead, I wonder who will lead his ministry?  His son Franklin?

Franklin and Beans.   That's got to be the name of the political lobbyist group that used to be a ministry.  Or maybe it always was a political lobbyist group.

Oh crap.  Politics and lack of Billy.  2 strikes for me here LOL.

 

[chockfull]

On 3/6/2018 at 6:42 PM, modcat5 said:

Socrates: your "Ruffles" post is not exactly called for.

....

Now, one more time: THIS THREAD IS ABOUT BILLY GRAHAM.

So now if Billy was shopping at your local grocer, and was in the potato chip aisle, do you think he would prefer

1. Ruffles With Ridges?

2. Lays Because Nobody Can Eat Just One?

Esplain your reasoning.

 

[Grace Valerie Claire]

24 minutes ago, chockfull said:

So now if Billy was shopping at your local grocer, and was in the potato chip aisle, do you think he would prefer

1. Ruffles With Ridges?

2. Lays Because Nobody Can Eat Just One?

Esplain your reasoning.

 

Chock, I would go with Ruffles with Ridges!!  LMAO!!

[Grace Valerie Claire]

39 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Franklin and Beans.   That's got to be the name of the political lobbyist group that used to be a ministry.  Or maybe it always was a political lobbyist group.

Oh crap.  Politics and lack of Billy.  2 strikes for me here LOL.

 

Chock, I think it will be Franklin, and Bullsheet.

[GoldStar]

Billy Graham Open Secret Alliances

This may Ruffle some feathers, but let the chips fall where they may...

Edited March 8, 2018 by GoldStar

[GoldStar]

What Billy Graham Taught With His Fingers

"he teacheth with his fingers" - Proverbs 6:13

Edited March 8, 2018 by GoldStar

[Grace Valerie Claire]

5 hours ago, GoldStar said:

Billy Graham Open Secret Alliances

This may Ruffle some feathers, but let the chips fall where they may...

GS, thanks for the link. Wow!!  BG certainly had an intresting life.  Was he a godly man?  In my view no, but I know others would say, he was the world's MOG during his lifetime.  Perhaps both views are valaid.