Be A Soldier In The Army Of The Lord

Service To Jesus Christ Is The Highest Calling

Archive for July 15th, 2007

There IS A Conspiracy!

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070713.html

A reader’s letter intrigues me. He writes, “I find everything you say
about a coming New World Order and One World Government extremely
difficult to believe. For one thing, while you yourself obviously
display no hate towards anyone, most other conspiracy theorists are
anti-Semites.” He further wrote, “An intelligent man such as yourself
would do well to distance yourself from these loony theories.”

I will quickly acknowledge that unfortunately there are a significant
number of conspiracy theories promulgated by people with obvious
anti-Semitic tendencies. I join my reader friend in repudiating such
bigotry.

However, just because certain conspiracy theories are advocated by
people with personal agendas and extremist ideologies is not reason
enough to automatically dismiss the facts that suggest there is a
conspiracy to steal America’s sovereignty and independence. These
facts are plentiful and powerful. Only foolish people would dismiss
them out-of-hand.

As a Christian, I believe the Word of God to be my source of faith and
practice. Therefore, I must take seriously the Word’s admonition that,
“There is a conspiracy” (Ezek. 22:25). In fact, the conspiracy to
overthrow righteousness (and any semblance of it) is ubiquitous.

Furthermore, if one will study American history, he will note our
Founding Fathers firmly believed a conspiracy of influential
internationalists was behind many of the draconian decisions of old
King George. They said as much in the Declaration of Independence.

In the Declaration, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “But when a long train of
abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a
design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it
is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards
for their future security.” If that isn’t a clear reference to
conspiracy, I don’t know what is.

As in British-controlled America 200 years ago, policies advanced by
like-minded politicos today attempt to erode our constitutional laws
and national independence. Only a naïve person would suggest that this
is mere coincidence. I remind my readers that George Bush, Sr. first
popularized the name “New World Order.” However, he is not the only
notable personality that has openly called for such an international
order.

Former newsman, Walter Cronkite, has openly called for world
government. Others calling for world government include England’s
Prime Minister, Tony Blair; former Clinton cabinet member, Strobe
Talbott; and a variety of spokesmen for the United Nations, as well as
leaders from various multinational corporations. To think that all of
these people (whose numbers are multitudinous) should not be taken
seriously is the height of idiocy.

Yes, my friends, there is a conspiracy. No, it is not a Jewish
conspiracy. It is much more than that. It is a conspiracy of elitists
from all races and ethnic backgrounds who deeply despise our
constitutional form of government, our national independence, and our
Christian heritage. Some are communists; others are socialists. Some
call themselves liberals, and some even call themselves conservatives.
Labels mean little.

Most of the conspirators are wealthy and well positioned to advance
their utopian ideas. Some teach in our nation’s colleges and
universities. Some occupy powerful positions in the media and in our
political institutions. Some of them are also found behind the pulpits
of churches, and, yes, some are found in synagogues.

The promoters of internationalism may not conduct monthly meetings.
They may not carry New World Order membership cards in their wallets
(albeit, if they are members of the Council of Foreign Relations,
people who love liberty should be very wary of them), but collectively
they form a credible conspiracy to rob America of its independence.
Furthermore, as long as patriotic Americans refuse to acknowledge
their existence, the more effective they are at accomplishing their
oligarchic objectives.

(c) Chuck Baldwin

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Posted in America, Christianity, George Bush, GOP, politics, Republican | Comments Off on There IS A Conspiracy!

Can You Imagine This Country?

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070710.html

We hear much today about the American dream. By “the American dream,”
most people mean buying a big house, driving an expensive automobile,
and making a lot of money. However, this was not the dream envisioned
by the Founding Fathers. Remember that, for the most part, America’s
founders gave up their material wealth and substance for something
they considered of far greater worth. Unfortunately, this hedonistic
generation knows little of the kind of sacrificial spirit personified
in the lives of America’s patriarchs.

In the minds of the founders, liberty–with all of its intrinsic
risks–was more desirable than material prosperity, if that prosperity
was accompanied with despotism or collectivism. So strong was their
desire that they were willing to give up the latter in order to
procure the former for themselves and their posterity.

How dare Americans today refer to material gain as “the American
dream.” It is not! It is the freedom to honestly pursue one’s goals
that should be celebrated. Material gain is only a fruit of freedom,
not its root.

Furthermore, much of America’s gain today is predicated upon
dishonorable and even dishonest practices. We have become a nation of
gamblers and socialists. We allow an unconstitutional tax system to
tax our brains out. Rather than cast off a tyrannical tax system,
however, we choose to cast away the noble virtue of industry and hard
work (because government will wind up with most of it, anyway) in
favor of receiving revenue from the labor and effort of others. It is
called socialism, and most Americans today (including Christians)
appear to fully embrace it.

We expect government to fund our retirement, to reimburse our losses,
and to even pay for our health care. What we cannot get from Uncle
Sam, we expect from Lady Luck. Americans today want the fruit of
freedom but seem unwilling to pay its purchase price. It was not
always this way.

Can you imagine a nation without an I.R.S.? Can you imagine a nation
with little crime and where children were free to pray in schools?
Can you imagine a nation where the father’s income was able to
adequately provide for his household? Can you imagine a country with
low divorce rates and where virtually everyone with a high school
diploma could both read and write and was capable of earning his or
her way in society?

Can you imagine a nation without an A.C.L.U. or a N.E.A.? Can you
imagine a country that did not legally murder its own unborn children
and that would not pander to sexual deviants or criminals? Can you
imagine a country that did not glorify, much less sponsor, gambling?
Can you imagine a nation with strong state governments and a limited
federal government?

Can you imagine a country where you could order a firearm through a
catalog and where there was no such thing as a B.A.T.F.E.? Well, you
might not be able to imagine such a country, but that was the kind of
nation our founders dreamed about, fought for, and bequeathed to their
posterity.

Unfortunately, since World War II, we Americans have seemed willing to
squander the sacrifice and repudiate the principles of our ancestors.
With the way things are going, can you imagine what this nation will
look like in another 50 years?

(c) Chuck Baldwin

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.

Posted in America, Christianity, politics | Comments Off on Can You Imagine This Country?

Like All Leading Republicans, Fred Thompson Is Secretly Pro – Abortion

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

This link exposes Thompson’s true colors if you had any doubts about him. I figured he would be weak on abortion when he was wanting to pass the buck from being a federal issue to a state by state issue. If we do it on important matters like this then we are no longer the UNITED STATES but the DIVIDED STATES OF AMERICA. You also notice that he is like Bush that can’t give a direct answer on a direct question but dances
around the issue. Knowing most of the religious right they would probably support this
fool.What is also interesting is not just the article but also the responses. Most of the republicans are for abortion. There were only 2 out of about 20 that that opposed abortion. They really put the others on the spot. But this is an indication that this country is really done for. There is no amount of catastrophies that will change wicked hearts. Just look at the Book of Revelation in the Bible. Even after the wicked suffer plagues and
disasters none of them repent but instead curse God. We are seeing such wickedness now. These are the very same fools that think they can war against God and win. I believe even those who think they are christians will be among these wicked that try to war with God. Well this article settles it for me because I realize that Thompson is a complete
phoney. The bushies will probably love him. None of the candidates seem to really qualify for my vote. Even Mike Huckabee is lockstep on this iraq war.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/03/12/87865.aspx

Posted in abortion, church corruption, Fred Thompson, GOP, politics, religious right, Republican, spiritual deception | Comments Off on Like All Leading Republicans, Fred Thompson Is Secretly Pro – Abortion

Billy Graham: It Gets Worse And Worse!

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

BILLY GRAHAM TRIES TO DUCK RESPONSIBILITY 
FOR SHOWCASING BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON – MY ANSWER
TO THE GRAHAM ORGANIZATION’S PRESS RELEASE
 

Billy Graham drew a record crowd to the second night of his New York Crusade by announcing that Bill and Hillary Clinton would be on the program. The Clintons both gave words of “testimony” before Dr. Graham preached. 

Now Graham is trying to avoid taking responsibility. In a July 1 news release, he said, “I didn’t endorse Hillary Clinton.” But it sure sounded like he did when he said “Mrs. Clinton might make a good President…” He would have a stronger case that this wasn’t an endorsement if he hadn’t gone on to say that Hillary should “run the country.” Everyone knows exactly what that means.

Billy Graham has been a public figure since 1949. No politician has been in the spotlight that long. In those 56 years he has become a literal media wizard. He doesn’t say things without planning his words very carefully ahead of time. I have been listening to him for over fifty years. Everything he says is prepared and scripted well in advance. He is certainly no “doddering old fool.” His mind is as sharp as a tack. You can be sure that his words about the Clintons were planned in great detail, and that even Franklin Graham’s “explanation,” given after the event, was written in advance. 

My question is this – why were the Clintons invited to be on the program at all? They hold the same extremely liberal views as Senator Edward Kennedy. Why should these far-left politicians appear at a Billy Graham Crusade, be honored and allowed to speak? At the very least it seems that Graham has deliberately slapped his most fervent conservative supporters in the face – by the very presence of these people on his program. I believe that Graham owes the nation a strong public apology for giving his platform to those sleazy politicians. Many good people will be deceived by Graham’s action, and I don’t understand why he said that Bill Clinton “should be an evangelist because he has all the gifts, and he could leave his wife to run the country.” What exactly are the “gifts” that Mr. Clinton possesses that make Graham think he ought to be an evangelist? What does Graham mean when he says that Mrs. Clinton ought to “run the country”? Dr. Graham should never have allowed these unscrupulous people to speak at his crusade, masquerading as born again Christians. Have we come to the place of accepting everything Graham says and does without question? 

No, I for one don’t swallow Billy Graham’s explanation, or his son Franklin’s either. After 56 years as a national figure Graham knows better than to have these people participate in his crusade in any way. 

So, Billy Graham thinks that Bill Clinton should become an evangelist – and Hillary should “run the country.” This is Graham’s latest monkey trick. He does these things to please the media and his ever softening new-evangelical base. In the early 1980’s, on a trip to the Soviet Union, he said there was no religious persecution under Communism. On a Larry King program a few years ago he said that people could be saved through other world religions without belief in Christ. This was repeated on Robert Schuller’s television program. Now Graham tells us that Bill Clinton should enter the field of evangelism and Hillary should “run the country.” Many people will be deceived by Graham’s statement. 

But the worst part of Billy Graham’s evangelism is his “decisionism.” Decisionist evangelism, since the time of Charles G. Finney, has brought hundreds of thousands of unsaved people into the churches. Decisionist evangelism is responsible for the apostasy in the Congregational denomination, the Methodist denomination, the Presbyterian denomination, and the various Baptist groups. Click here to read Dr. John S. Waldrip’s article, “How I Was Confronted with Decisionism,” and my sermons, “Natural Men Do Not Want the Gospel,” “We Are Against Decisionism – In Both its Main Forms,” and “Superficial Decisionism and True Revival Contrasted.” To understand how Finney’s beliefs and methods ruined evangelism, subsequently followed by all evangelists, order a copy of my carefully documented book, “Today’s Apostasy: How Decisionism is Destroying our Churches,” by phoning (818)352-0452 (the above column is based on two articles taken from Newsmax, 6/26/05 and 7/1/05).

(END OF ARTICLE)
You can read Dr. Hymers’ sermons each week on the Internet
at
www.rlhymersjr.com. Click on “Sermon Manuscripts.”

Posted in America, bill clinton, Billy Graham, catholicism, Christianity, church corruption, hillary clinton, idolatry, media, politics, prophecy, spiritual deception, TBN, trinity broadcasting network | Comments Off on Billy Graham: It Gets Worse And Worse!

Billy Graham Endorsed Hillary Clinton For President!

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

BILLY GRAHAM ENDORSES HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT!

by Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr.

 

Sunday, June 26, 2005

Speaking to thousands of people on the second night of his crusade in New York City, Billy Graham stood by the side of former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary.  Graham said “Mrs. Clinton might make a good President.”  He called Bill Clinton and his wife “wonderful friends” and “a great couple.”  Graham said that the former President “should become an evangelist and allow his wife to run the country.”

After being endorsed by Graham, Hillary gave a “testimony” and former President Bill Clinton praised Graham for integrating his crusades in the late 1950’s.

So, Billy Graham thinks that Bill Clinton should become an evangelist – and Hillary should be President!  This is the latest tomfoolery from Graham.  In the early 1980’s he said there was no religious persecution under Communism in the Soviet Union.  On a Larry King program a few years ago he said that people could be saved through other world religions without Christ.  This was repeated on Robert Schuller’s television program.  Now Billy Graham tells us that Bill Clinton should enter the field of evangelism and “Hillary might make a good President.”  Many people will be deceived by Graham’s statement. 

But the worst part of Billy Graham’s evangelism is his “decisionism.”  Decisional evangelism, since the time of Charles Finney, has brought hundreds of thousands of people into the churches in an unconverted state.  Decisional evangelism is responsible for the apostasy in the Congregational Church, the Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church, and the various major Baptist denominations.  Click here to read Dr. John S. Waldrip’s article, “How I Was Confronted with Decisionism,” and my sermons, “Natural Men Do Not Want the Gospel,”We Are Against Decisionism – In Both its Main Forms,” and “Superficial Decisionism and True Revival Contrasted.”   To understand how Finney ruined evangelism, subsequently followed by all evangelists, order a copy of my carefully documented book, “Today’s Apostasy,” by phoning (818)352-0452 (the above column is based on an article taken from Newsmax, 6/26/05).  

(END OF ARTICLE)
You can read Dr. Hymers’ sermons each week on the Internet
at
www.rlhymersjr.com. Click on “Sermon Manuscripts.”

Posted in America, Billy Graham, catholicism, Christianity, church corruption, hillary clinton, idolatry, masonry, media, politics, prophecy, spiritual deception, TBN, trinity broadcasting network | Comments Off on Billy Graham Endorsed Hillary Clinton For President!

Billy Graham Apostasy Exposed

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

Billy Graham  General Teachings/Activities

–  Billy Graham (born in 1918) has Parkinson’s disease, a progressive nervous disorder that has already made it impossible for him to drive a car or write by hand. Graham, an ordained Southern Baptist (SBC), heads a $100 million a year evangelistic empire, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) (Graham is now paid $101,250 per year with a $33,750 housing allowance.) The BGEA also operates a 1,500 acre training center, “The Cove,” located in Asheville, North Carolina. The Cove was started in 1987 and includes an inn and a Cove camp for youths ages 9-15. Approximately 5-10,000 adults are trained there annually in Graham-style evangelism.

Graham’s magazine, Decision, reaches 1.7 million people, his column appears in more than 100 newspapers, his radio program is on 700 stations worldwide, and several of his books have been best-sellers. (Angels, published in 1975, sold one million copies in just 90 days.) Graham has reportedly preached to over 200 million people and once claimed that precisely 2,874,082 of them have stepped forward to “accept Jesus Christ as personal Savior” (11/15/93, Time magazine). Former President Bush called Graham “America’s pastor.” Harry Truman called him a “counterfeit” and publicity seeker. Pat Boone considers him “the greatest man since Jesus.” Still another says Graham “has done more harm to the cause of Christ than any other living man.” Who’s correct? Read on and judge for yourself.

–  In 1995, Billy Graham’s prodigal son Franklin, was named first vice chairman and eventual successor to his father’s crusade organization. Billy Graham will remain chairman and head preacher as long as he is able. Franklin wears jeans, boots, denim shirt, and leather jacket. He was a teen rebel who drank, smoked, fought, and led police on high-speed chases. He was kicked out of LeTourneau College. He will continue as director of Samaritan’s Purse and World Medical Mission, both social gospel organizations.

Early in June 1996, Franklin Graham, interviewed on CNBC, declared, “[W]hether it’s the Roman Catholic Church … the Orthodox Church …we’d all agree … it’s Jesus Christ who paid the penalty for sin.” That statement was tragically deceptive. Could Franklin, like his father, be unaware that Catholicism and Orthodoxy, while using the same Biblical words as evangelicals, mean something else? Franklin Graham told the Indianapolis Star (6/3/99) that his father’s longstanding ecumenical alliance with the Catholic Church and all other denominations, “was one of the smartest things his father ever did.” The charismatic Charisma magazine in 10/95 contained a 7-page article on Franklin Graham. They quoted him as saying, “I thank God for the warmth I see within many of the charismatic churches — their love for the Lord and love for the scriptures. …” He also said, “Probably (Samaritan’s Purse) largest base of support comes from the charismatic community.” He has referred to “Mother” Teresa as an “example of the woman God uses” (4/1/99, Calvary Contender).

Franklin Graham is a chip off the old block, and you may be sure that he will compromise as much or more than his father. Look for little change from the current ecumenical stance of the BGEA once Franklin takes over full time — or worse — Franklin Graham does not use his father’s word, “crusade,” but uses the secular seeker-sensitive word “festival” for his meetings. His 5/99 “festival” at the University of Alabama drew 50,000. The 5/13/99 Alabama Baptist listed some Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) performers, and said “contemporary Christian artist Steven Curtis Chapman had the young people rocking and singing on the coliseum floor. …” (Source: 6/15/99, Calvary Contender.)

–  Norman Vincent Peale was the person who was not only responsible for bringing “Christian” psychology into the professing Church, but he also advocated such New Age and/or occult teachings as visualization, pantheism, human potential, positive confession, positive thinking, etc. Once on the Phil Donahue Show, Peale, a 33rd degree Mason, said, “It’s not necessary to be born again. You have your way to God, I have mine. I found eternal peace in a Shinto shrine.” (Shintoism is an ancient Oriental religion that fuses ancestor worship with mysticism.) He also denied the necessity of believing in the virgin birth.

Peale’s false teachings apparently mattered little to Billy Graham. Bible for Today quoted Graham as saying in a speech at a National Council of Churches luncheon on 12/6/66: “I don’t know anyone who has done more for the kingdom of God than Norman and Ruth Peale, or have meant any more in my life — the encouragement they have given me” (Hayes Minnick, BFT Report #565, p. 28). (Maybe Billy meant to say that he could think of no one who had done more evil for the cause of Christ than the Peales?) Graham even once allowed Peale to give the benediction at one of his New York City rallies, and then sent the names of some 400 new “converts” to Peale’s Marble Collegiate Church.

–  One of Norman Vincent Peale’s most “successful” protégés is Robert Schuller. Schuller teaches that there is no need for one to recognize his own personal sin, no need for repentance, and no need for the crucifixion of self. Concerning the latter point, Schuller teaches just the opposite philosophy — that self is to be exalted — which is nothing less than an outright denial of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. (See Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, wherein Schuller says, “Jesus knew His worth; His success fed His self-esteem. He suffered the cross to sanctify His self-esteem and He bore the cross to sanctify your self-esteem. The cross will sanctify the ego trip” [cf. Matthew 16:24].)

Yet, Graham endorses this apostate as well, saying: “Robert Schuller is a great man of God, whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop and loose” (cf. John the Baptist’s statement when speaking of Jesus in John 1:27!). Graham is also the one who advised Schuller, back in 1969, to start his “Hour of Power” television show. In 1972, Graham made Schuller a leader in his Anaheim Crusade, saying, “There is no one in all the world I love in Christ more than I do Bob Schuller. … He has done some of the greatest things for the Kingdom of God of any man in our generation” (David Beale, S.B.C. House on the Sand, p. 144). Graham made a personal appearance on Schuller’s 1000th anniversary program (aired 4/2/89), relating how he had encouraged Schuller 20 years earlier when he said, “Bob, why don’t you think of telecasting your services.” [Graham spoke at Robert Schuller’s Crystal Cathedral in 1985, and the two men came up with a joint definition of “born again” as “a decision to stop carrying your own luggage” (Paul Harvey’s report, 7/15/85).]

–  Cooperation with a Graham crusade will automatically necessitate fellowship with those who have denied the cardinal doctrines of the faith. For example, Graham not only has influential unbelievers on his crusade platforms, but has also had, on a regular basis since at least 1972, Catholic counselors counsel with new Roman Catholic “converts,” referring these new converts back to their own Catholic churches for follow-up. In fact, Graham won’t even hold a crusade in a city unless he is assured of wide denominational support (i.e., ecumenical backing). The issue then is more than the authenticity of Billy Graham’s Christianity, but is instead the fact that any involvement whatsoever with Graham and/or his organization means “association for religious purposes with people who hold to another gospel: in some cases a Roman Catholic gospel, in others a modernistic gospel,” and in others still, no gospel at all (R.J. Sheehan, C.H. Spurgeon and the Modern Church, pp.97-98). [Graham’s habit of referring back to the Catholic Church can even be documented as far back as 1957! In a 9/21/57 interview with the San Francisco News, Graham said, “Anyone who makes a decision at our meetings is seen later and referred to a local clergyman, Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish.” (More recently, Graham’s 1994 Crusades in Minneapolis and Cleveland: 6,000 respondents at each Crusade referred back to the Catholic Church; Graham’s 9/96 Charlotte, NC Crusade: 1,700 respondents referred back to the Catholic Church)]

Over the years, Catholic leaders have learned they have nothing to fear from Billy Graham crusades. They use the Graham crusades to retrieve non-practicing Catholics and even to gain proselytes to Romanism. Graham’s call to “receive Christ,” or “make the step of faith,” or “come to Christ tonight,” is general enough to allow Catholic leaders to insert their sacramental gospel into it. And the fact that Graham is working with the Catholic churches and never sounds any warnings about Romanism gives people the idea that he accepts their theology. Catholic priests simply teach the inquirers that they are born again at baptism and repeatedly renewed in Christ through all sorts of religious activities — the mass, family duties, the rosary, even coming forward at evangelistic rallies (Wilson Ewin, The Assimilation of Evangelist Billy Graham Into the Roman Catholic Church, pp. 38-39):

“For some unexplainable or even mysterious reason, Billy Graham is unable to discern the theological, moral, and spiritual soul of Roman Catholicism. Likewise, he has failed to grasp, or worse still, has chosen to ignore the historical character of the entire Vatican system. Instead, he has chosen to become attracted, impressed, and finally to honor and follow the Holy See. The result has been a tragic failure on his part to understand the difference between the truth of God’s Word and the utter blackness of Roman Catholicism” (Ewin, p. 22).

[“Early on in my life, I didn’t know much about Catholics. But through the years I have made many friends within the Roman Catholic church. In fact, when we hold a crusade in a city now, nearly all the Roman Catholic churches support it. And when we went to Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn., for the crusade [last year], we saw St. Paul, which is largely Catholic, and Minneapolis, which is largely Lutheran, both supporting the crusade. That wouldn’t have happened 25 years ago” (Billy Graham interview with Promise Keepers New Man magazine, March-April 1997).]

–  The Billy Graham Crusade held 9/92 in the Portland, Oregon area is an excellent example of Graham’s compromise with Rome. The Catholic Sentinel of Oregon (April 24, 1992) contained an article entitled “Counselors Recruited For Billy Graham Crusade.” The Sentinel reported that 10,000 counselors were expected to attend the necessary classes, and the Roman Catholic churches had set a goal to supply 6,000 of these. The article also stated, (regarding the “decision makers”): “Those who have been baptized Catholic or express a Catholic preference will be directed to local parishes that are part of the Crusade.”

Fellowship with the Catholic Church was not the only worldliness at the Crusade. The 9/13/92 Oregonian said: “Over 7,000 young Christians plugged into their source at the Graham Crusade’s Power Surge youth rally Saturday night in the Portland Memorial Coliseum. With the amplifiers turned up, and the lights turned down, the young T-shirt-and-jeans crowd rocked the rafters with songs of praise, lifted up on a pulsating rock beat.”

After the Crusade was over, the 9/25/92 Catholic Sentinel had these words of favor for Graham:

“Graham’s message is for people to return to God and their churches. … Graham offered special praise for the Catholic Church, saying, ‘We’re delighted that the Roman Catholic Church now cooperates with us wherever we go …'”

–  Graham even finds it difficult to take a truly Christian position on moral issues. When in Portland for the aforementioned 9/92 Crusade, Graham had the unique opportunity to declare that homosexuality is sin. He was asked about his position on Oregon’s upcoming (11/92) statewide referendum that would declare homosexuality abnormal, and would thereby prohibit government support of it. Rather than giving a clear answer from the Bible, Graham played the politician:

“I find it is emotional, with strong arguments on both sides of the issue. I intend to stay out of national and local politics while here. God loves all people whatever their ethnic or political background or their social orientation. … Christians take opposing views on many issues … those on both sides of the issue must love each other. … I never speak against other groups” (9/22/92, The Statesman Journal).

On the 12/22/94 Larry King Live Show, Graham also said that he believed that homosexuals are born with a tendency toward homosexuality; i.e., in the genes.

Concerning the issue of abortion, a year earlier on ABC’s “Good Morning America” (GMA) (9/5/91), Graham, when asked the Christian position on abortion, said: “… there is a Christian position, I think. But I’m not prepared to say what it is.” And, again two weeks later on GMA (9/19/91), Graham said: “But there are occasions when abortion is the only alternative” (although he didn’t say when it is okay to snuff out innocent, unborn human life). (Reported in the 2/22/93, Christian News.)

In an interview in TV Guide (8/6/94), Graham says, when asked about the issues of abortion and homosexuality:

“I don’t get involved in the abortion thing. I agree with the Pope, whom I know well, on abortion. But I just don’t take extreme positions. I preach to unite people. There is a great division in the religious community today. God loves homosexual as much as anyone else. I think homosexuality is a sin, but no greater than idolatry and adultery. In my judgment, it’s not that big.”

–  In 1948, Billy Graham was asked: “What do you expect the World Council of Churches (WCC) to do this August when they visit Copenhagen?” He replied: “I believe they are going to nominate the Antichrist!” As early as 1966, however, Graham boasted that he attended the WCC assembly in New Delhi in 1961, and he hoped he would attend the 4th assembly in Uppsala, Sweden in 1968 (which he did). He has attended all but two WCC General Assemblies since!

Graham’s collaboration with apostate ecumenical leaders (such as with those in the WCC), his refusal to expose the unscriptural position upon which their search for “Christian unity” is based, and his willingness to cooperate with apostate religious leaders, was demonstrated once again in his reported cordial visit with Konrad Raiser, General Secretary of the World Council of Churches. The EPS report said, “Raiser reported that he and Graham had a friendly, informal and wide-ranging conversation. Graham recalled his attendance at the earlier WCC general assemblies and talked about many of his current activities, Raiser said. An assistant to Graham later expressed hope that WCC efforts to develop ties with Graham and other evangelicals would continue, Raised said, and reported that he had invited Graham to visit WCC headquarters in Geneva whenever he could do so.”

–  The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association held its North American Conference for Itinerant Evangelists in Louisville, Kentucky 6/28/94-7/1/94. It included the participation of more than 40 denominations and organizations as Graham predicted that “a new generation of evangelists is on the horizon.” This conference followed the pattern of previous conferences — it gave a great boost to WCC-NCC denominations, the charismatic movement, and the Roman Catholic Church. In the waning years of his ministry, Graham is giving great emphasis to training the future generation of evangelists to disobey God’s Word when it comes to working with those who preach a false gospel .(Original source: Sept/Oct 1993, Foundation magazine.)

–  In 1952, and again in 1958, Billy Graham made sound statements concerning the separation from those who teach false doctrine. For example, in 1952 he wrote to Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.: “We have never had a man on our [crusade] committee that denied the virgin birth, the vicarious atonement, or the bodily resurrection.” In 1958, Graham stated in Eternity magazine: “If a man blatantly denies the deity of Christ or that Christ has come in the flesh, we are not to even bid him Godspeed. Thus, the Scriptures teach that we are to be separated from those who deny the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. … I am to treat him as an Antichrist and an enemy of the cross.” Yet, as early as 1963, Graham had United Methodist Bishop, Gerald B. Kennedy, as his Los Angeles Crusade Chairman. Kennedy wrote in one of his books (God’s Good News, p. 125): “I believe that the testimony of the New Testament taken as a whole is against the doctrine of the deity of Jesus. …” Yet Graham said of Kennedy in 1963, “Bishop Kennedy is one of the ten greatest Christian preachers in America.”

–  Perhaps most dramatic is Graham’s change regarding false religions. In 1948, he said: “The three gravest menaces faced by Orthodox Christianity are Communism, Roman Catholicism, and Mohammedanism.” By 1973, however, Graham had changed his tune. He said that Communist Mao Tse-Tung’s “eight precepts are basically the same as the Ten Commandments,” he praised the Roman Catholic mass as a “very beautiful thing” (see later item), and said Mohammed Ali’s beliefs in Islam “are something we all could believe.”

Even earlier, in 1966, Graham said, “I find myself closer to Catholics than the radical Protestants. I think the Roman Catholic Church today is going through a second Reformation” (5/24/66, Philadelphia Evening Bulletin). According to Graham, this “Reformation” must have been completed by 1978, when he said, “I found that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Catholics. We only differ on some matters of later church tradition. I find that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Roman Catholics” (1/78, McCall’s Magazine).

–  Graham’s gospel and Roman Catholicism’s gospel are, in reality, no different. In 1978, McCall’s Magazine reported Dr. Graham’s “updated” understanding of the way of salvation:

“I used to think that pagans in far-off countries were lost — were going to hell — if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. … I believe there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God — through nature, for instance — and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying yes to God.”

This, of course, is a false gospel (cf. Jn. 14:6) — and one that condemns the one who preaches it (cf. Jn. 14:6; Gal. 1:8,9)! [It’s difficult to know what Graham really believes about hell. One thing for sure, to Graham it’s not literal: “The only thing I could say for sure is that hell means separation from God. We are separated from His light, from His fellowship. That is going to hell. When it comes to a literal fire, I don’t preach it because I’m not sure about it. When the Scripture uses fire concerning hell, that is possibly an illustration of how terrible it’s going to be — not fire but something worse, a thirst for God that cannot be quenched.” (11/15/93, Time magazine).

–  In 1985, Graham affirmed his belief that those outside of Christ might be saved. Los Angeles reporter David Colker asked Graham: “What about people of other faiths who live good lives but don’t profess a belief in Christ?” Graham replied, “I’m going to leave that to the Lord. He’ll decide that” (Los Angeles Herald Examiner, 7/22/85). While this answer might appear reasonable to those who do not know the Bible, in reality it is a great compromise of the truth. God has already decided what will happen to those who die outside of faith in Jesus Christ. The book of Ephesians describes the condition of such as “children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3) and “having no hope, and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12). That is why Christ must be preached. Men without a saving knowledge of Christ are condemned already (John 3:18). There is no mystery or question about this matter, because the Bible has plainly spoken.

In 1993, Graham repeated this philosophy in an interview with David Frost:

“And I think there is that hunger for God and people are living as best they know how according to the light that they have. Well, I think they’re in a separate category than people like Hitler and people who have just defied God, and shaken their fists at God. … I would say that God, being a God of mercy, we have to rest it right there, and say that God is a God of mercy and love, and how it happens, we don’t know” (The Charlotte Observer, 2/16/93). [As reported in Evangelicals and Rome, by David Cloud.]

–  In 1948, Graham called Roman Catholics “one of the three gravest menaces facing orthodox Christianity.” Today, he works arm in arm with them, having become an all-out supporter. He has received numerous Catholic awards, and is one of Pope John Paul II’s greatest admirers and boosters, as evidenced by his full support of a 1989 Charismatic plan to award the Pope the “Prince of Peace Prize” (which the Pope subsequently turned down), and by his having referred to the Pope as, “the greatest religious leader of the modern world,” and as a “statesman, a pastor, and an evangelist.” Here is a brief history of Graham’s papal overtures:

1963: Upon the death of Pope John XXIII, Graham said from Bonn, Germany, “I admired Pope John tremendously … I felt he brought a new era to the world. It is my hope that the Cardinals elect a new Pope who will follow the same line as John. It would be a great tragedy if they chose a man who reacted against John” (2/2/63, Michigan City News-Dispatch; 6/8/63, Chicago Tribune).

1973: Graham recommended Roman Catholic literature in the ecumenical Key ’73 meetings held across North America; he especially recommended a biography of the Pope John XXIII containing hundreds of pages of devotion to Mary and the Saints, worship of the host (wafer) at the Mass, and his [the Pope’s] trust in the sacraments as the means of salvation. Graham advertised this book as “a classic in devotion” (2/86, The Gospel Standard; Key ’73: Congregational Resource Book).

1979: Billy Graham appeared on the Phil Donahue show on 10/11, and in discussing Pope John Paul II’s visit to the U.S.A., said: “I think the American people are looking for a leader, a moral and spiritual leader that believes something. And the Pope does. … Thank God, I’ve got somebody to quote now with some real authority.”

Graham said elsewhere: “The visit of Pope John Paul II to the United States is an event of great significance not only for Roman Catholics, but for all Americans — as well as the world … In the short time he has been the Pope, John Paul II has become the moral leader of the world. My prayers and the prayers of countless other Protestants will be with him as he makes his journey (9/27/79, Religious New Service dispatch; quoted in New Neutralism II, p. 40). (Emphasis added.) He also said that John Paul II, “is almost an evangelist because he calls to people to turn to Christ, to turn to Christianity” (The Star, June 26, 1979; reprinted in the Australian Beacon, August 1979, p. 1).

1980: “Since his election, Pope John Paul II has emerged as the greatest religious leader of the modern world, and one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century … The Pope came [to America] as a statesman and a pastor, but I believe he also sees himself coming as an evangelist. … The Pope sought to speak to the spiritual hunger of our age in the same way Christians throughout the centuries have spoken to the spiritual yearnings of every age — by pointing people to Christ” (Saturday Evening Post, Jan.-Feb. 1980). [In this same article, Graham was quoted as saying, “Recently I learned the word ‘Pontiff’ comes from the Latin words which originally meant ‘bridge builder.’ … Pope John Paul II [is] indeed a bridge builder, and that is something our divided world desperately needs.” Historically, “pontiff” does not mean bridge-builder, but refers to the papal title of Pontifex Maximus, which was handed down to the early popes from the high priests of ancient heathen religion in the Roman Empire; “Pontiff” in Italian and Latin means “bridge,” and clearly points to the Pope’s blasphemous claim that he himself is that bridge between man and God.]

1981: Graham met with Pope John Paul II on 1/13 and was reported in the Religious News Service as saying, “We had a spiritual time,” and that the intense conversations lasting about two hours were “very private, intimate conversation. He [the Pope] was extremely warm and interested in our work” (2/6/81 & 7/17/81, Christianity Today).

1984: On coming to Vancouver less than a month after the Pope had been there, Graham commented on the Pope’s message: “I’ll tell you, that was just about as straight an evangelical address as I’ve ever heard. It was tremendous. Of course, I’m a great admirer of his. He gives moral guidance in a world that seems to have lost its way” (Foundation, Vol. V, Iss. 5, 1984).

1989: Graham spoke about a meeting with Pope John Paul II: “There was a pause in the conversation; suddenly the Pope’s arm shot out and he grabbed the lapels of my coat, he pulled me forward within inches of his own face. He fixed his eyes on me and said, ‘Listen Graham, we are brothers'” (6/8/89, Today). Graham said that that was a great happening in his life.

1990: After meeting with the Pope, Graham said that it is particularly evident in the Pope’s speeches that his attitudes and decisions, “are based on his great personal spiritual life. … he bases his work and messages and vision on biblical principles” (Ewin, The Assimilation of Evangelist Billy Graham Into the Roman Catholic Church, 1992, p. N).

1993: At a 7/12 interview by Joan Lunden on ABC-TV’s “Good Morning America,” Graham said: “I’m delighted the Pope is coming [to Denver for a Catholic youth conference] … I admire the Pope even though I don’t agree with him on everything …” [The Pope in talks this year insists that he is the infallible “Vicar of Christ.” How can anyone who proclaims the one and only true Gospel ever be “delighted” that a counterfeit christ would come with a false gospel to beguile thousands of youth?]

–  On 4/21/72, Graham received the Catholic International Franciscan Award for “his contribution to true ecumenism” and “his sincere and authentic ecumenism” (4/22/72, Minneapolis Star). In acknowledging the award, Graham said, “While I am not worthy to touch the shoe laces of St. Francis, yet this same Christ that called Francis in the 13th century also called me to be one of his servants in the 20th century” (2/86, The Gospel Standard).

–  Graham was instrumental in paving the way for Vatican ties with President Reagan’s decision to appoint an ambassador to the Vatican (Charisma, May, 1984, pp. 101-102). The President asked Graham to help the national security adviser, William P. Clark, to gather responses for establishing formal diplomatic relations with the Holy See. The Christian “leaders” contacted by Graham were Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Billy Melvin (Executive Secretary of the NAE), David Hubbard (then president of Fuller Seminary), and Gilbert Beers (then editor of Christianity Today). A letter to Dr. Graham sent to Mr. Clark was also obtained and quoted Graham as saying, “If anyone can do it and get away with it, it is Mr. Reagan …”

–  On 12/9/79, popular Catholic Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen died. Sheen was a Catholic traditionalist who upheld Rome’s dogmas. He was a staunch enemy of the New Testament faith. Yet, Graham called Sheen’s death:

“a great loss to the nation and both the Catholic and Protestant churches. He broke down walls of prejudice between Catholics and Protestants. … I mourn his death and look forward to our reunion in heaven” (12/22/79 ,EP News Service).

But Sheen’s hope was in Mary, not in Christ’s completed atonement. Unless he repented and turned wholly to Christ on his deathbed, there is no reason to believe Sheen will be in heaven (David Cloud, Flirting With Rome, Vol. I: Billy Graham, p. 31). [Of course, why not Fulton Sheen in heaven if Elvis is going to be there? — In an article in the 4/16/92 issue of USA Today, Graham stated that he “expects to spend eternity with God, the great, and the good — including Elvis Presley.”]

–  Graham once said: “It is my opinion that we ought not to contrast the ‘nurture of grace’ and the ‘grace of conversion’ as many have tried to do. I am convinced that there are both, and happy is the man who by the nurture of grace is brought to the grace of conversion.” Anyone familiar with Roman Catholicism knows that their “nurture of grace” refers to the grace of the seven sacraments. Thus, Graham has both learned and accepted Rome’s sacramental grace!

We should not be surprised, then, to learn that Graham also holds to Rome’s false gospel of baptismal regeneration! The following quote is from an article written in October of 1961 after Graham gave an interview to Lutheran clergyman Wilfred Bockelman, who was then the associate editor of The Lutheran Standard: (Emphasis added.)

“I do believe that something happens at the baptism of an infant, particularly if the parents are Christians and teach their children Christian truths from childhood. We cannot fully understand the mysteries of God, but I believe a miracle can happen in these children so that they are regenerated, that is, made Christians through infant baptism. If you want to call that baptismal regeneration, that’s all right with me” (10/10/61, The Lutheran Standard).

Bockelman said, “One would assume that, as a Baptist, Dr. Graham would be opposed to infant baptism.” Bockelman not only found this not to be the case, but that Graham’s wife, Ruth, and all their children but the youngest, were baptized as infants. (Reported in the Summer 1991 Dorea, pp. 9-10.)

–  Graham has said that the virgin birth of Christ is NOT an essential part of the Christian faith. In an interview with a United Church of Canada publication in 1966 (“Billy Graham Answers 26 Provocative Questions,” United Church Observer, July 1, 1966), Graham gave the following reply to a question about the virgin birth of Christ:

Q. Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin birth — not just as a symbol of the incarnation or of Christ’s divinity — as an historic event is necessary for personal salvation?

A. While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation.

In his zeal to appease the apostates in the United Church of Christ (its current moderator, Bill Phipps, denies that Jesus Christ is God), Graham tells an absolute lie. How would it be possible for a saved person to deny the virgin birth of Jesus Christ? If Jesus Christ were not virgin born, He was a sinner; and if He were a sinner, He could not have died for our sins. Further, if Christ were a sinner, and if He were not virgin born, He was a liar for making such claims and the Bible that records those claims is a blatant and wicked lie, and the Bible-believing Christian is a deceived and foolish person whose faith has no authoritative foundation. Therefore, apart from the virgin birth, there is no Gospel and no Salvation and no authoritative Bible. The virgin birth of Christ is “fatal” doctrine, meaning it is crucial for salvation. The entire Gospel stands or falls on the virgin birth (Evangelicals and Rome, by David Cloud).

–  A recent interview on CNN’s “Larry King Live” television broadcast once again reveals just how far Graham has fallen from the orthodox teaching of Scripture. King interviewed Graham for a full hour on Christmas Day, 1998. During the course of the interview, King questioned Graham about the afterlife soon after Graham had mentioned he was not afraid to die since he knew he would be with God (italics added):

GRAHAM: I’ll know Him. He’ll know me. He will receive me. I believe the moment that I die, an angel comes and takes my hand and leads me into His presence.

KING: In your body or through a soul?

GRAHAM: Both — maybe both, because we have been resurrected. Remember, this body’s coming back together again. Nothing ever disappears …

KING: All right. You’ll meet Jesus and then what will it be like? What will paradise be like?

GRAHAM: It’s going to be like paradise. It’ll be the — everything that you ever wanted for happiness will be there. People say that the Bible teaches there’s no sex in Heaven. If sex is necessary for our happiness and fulfillment, it’ll be there. And then, if certain other things that we think are pleasurable will — it’ll be there.

Once again, Graham’s theology is completely contrary to Scripture. God’s Word never teaches that whatever is necessary for physical human happiness will be the believer’s lot in heaven. On the contrary, the believer will rejoice in praising God and fulfilling His will, not the desired will of the individual. The believer’s physical body, while on the earth, is still wrestling with the lusts of the flesh and the pride of life that are certainly pleasurable to the earthly saint. But heaven will be a place where the believer will fulfill the will of the Savior and honor and glorify Him throughout all eternity. To give the impression that heaven will be a type of hedonistic paradise is dangerous, false theology. (Excerpted and/or adapted from the Jan-Feb 1999, Foundation magazine.)

–  Graham also believes that men can be saved apart from the Name of Christ. (Source: 5/31/98 television interview with Robert Schuller, as reported in the May-June 1997, Foundation magazine.):

SCHULLER: Tell me, what do you think is the future of Christianity?

GRAHAM: Well, Christianity and being a true believer — you know, I think there’s the Body of Christ. This comes from all the Christian groups around the world, outside the Christian groups. I think everybody that loves Christ, or knows Christ, whether they’re conscious of it or not, they’re members of the Body of Christ. [How can anyone love Christ or know Christ and not be conscious of it (Rom. 8:9,16; 10:14; 1 John 3:24; 4:13; John 3:18)?] And I don’t think that we’re going to see a great sweeping revival that will turn the whole world to Christ at any time. I think James answered that — the Apostle James in the first council in Jerusalem, when he said that God’s purpose for this age is to call out a people for His name. And that’s what God is doing today, He’s calling people out of the world for His name, whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the Body of Christ because they’ve been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus [How can this be? (cf. Acts 4:12; Rom 10:13)], but they know in their hearts that they need something that they don’t have, and they turn to the only light that they have, and I think that they are saved, and that they’re going to be with us in heaven.

SCHULLER: Well, what I hear you saying, that it’s possible for Jesus Christ to come into human hearts and soul and life, even if they’ve been born in darkness and have never had exposure to the Bible. Is that a correct interpretation of what you’re saying?

GRAHAM: Yes, it is, because I believe that. I’ve met people in various parts of the world in tribal situations, that they have never seen a Bible or heard about a Bible, and never heard of Jesus, but they’ve believed in their hearts that there was a God, and they’ve tried to live a life that was quite apart from the surrounding community in which they lived.

SCHULLER: [R.S. trips over his tongue for a moment, his face beaming, then says] This is fantastic! I’m so thrilled to hear you say that! There’s a wideness in God’s mercy!

GRAHAM: There is. There definitely is.

What Graham is actually saying here is: “Sinners can be saved by their good works and that a personal relationship to Jesus Christ by being born again is NOT necessary to salvation.” This statement also directly agrees with the Roman Catholic universal catechism, page 224; para. 847:

“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience, those too may achieve eternal salvation.”

Thus, Roman Catholicism, and Billy Graham, have said that even if you never hear about Christ, you can still be saved by being the best person you can be. This directly contradicts Acts 4:12 which says, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Jesus, Himself left no doubt: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

–  Graham refuses to defend the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Newsweek magazine, April 26, 1982, examined the debate on the issue of Biblical infallibility. The article noted that Billy Graham is not on the side of inerrancy:

“Billy Graham, for one, clearly is not. ‘I believe the Bible is the inspired, authoritative word of God,’ Graham says, ‘but I don’t use the word “inerrant” because it’s become a brittle divisive word.'”

Graham avoids controversy at any cost. He knows that Modernists and unbelieving Evangelicals are willing to call the Bible “authoritative and inspired” even while denying that it is the infallible and inerrant Word of God. Graham aligns himself with this unbelieving camp. If the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God, who can dogmatically determine which part is and which part is not inerrant? If the Bible is not inerrant, it is not authoritative (Source: Evangelicals and Rome, by David Cloud).

–  Never mind that the Catholic sacrament of the Mass is the greatest attack ever on the finished work of Christ (cf. Heb. 10:19-22), Graham thinks the Mass is not only beautiful, but that it is clear in the gospel!:

“This past week I preached in the great Catholic cathedral a funeral sermon for a close friend of mine who was a Catholic, and they had several Bishops and Archbishops to participate. And as I sat there going through the funeral Mass, that was a very beautiful thing, and certainly straight and clear in the gospel. There was a wonderful little priest that would tell me when to stand and when to kneel and what to do” (O Timothy, Vol. 10, Issue 9, 1993, pp. 16-17).

There you have it. Billy Graham kneeling and worshiping the Mass wafer! It evidently matters not to Graham that the Mass destroys the Biblical teaching of Christ’s atonement, and thereby, the very Gospel itself.

–  In an interview with the Bookstore Journal, Graham again states quite clearly his position on ecumenism, and shows just how far he is willing to twist Scripture in order to support it:

“Another significant thing happened in the early ’50s in Boston. [Catholic] Cardinal Cushing … put ‘Bravo Billy’ on the front cover [of his magazine]. That made news all over the country. He and I became close, wonderful friends. That was my first real coming to grips with the whole Protestant/Catholic situation. I began to realize that there were Christians everywhere. They might be called modernists, Catholics, or whatever, but they were Christians. Jesus taught, ‘By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.’ And that love is more important than anything else. I don’t think I’ve ever departed from that realization” (November 1991, Bookstore Journal).

–  In 1964, Graham’s aide, George Edstrom, wrote: “Mr. Graham has never preached in a Catholic Church, and he does not agree with them in the joining of one church. If you heard this, it is nothing but false rumors.” Yet, as early as 1963, one year prior to the above statement, Graham had spoken at the Roman Catholic Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina.

In 1967, Graham again spoke at Belmont Abbey, at the Institute for Ecumenical Dialogue, receiving his honorary Doctor of Humane Letters (D.H.L.) from them and saying that this was “… a time when Protestants and Catholics could meet together, and greet each other as brothers, whereas ten years ago they could not.” Graham said he “knew of no greater honor a North Carolina preacher, reared just a few miles from here, could have than to be presented with this degree. I’m not sure but what this could start me being called ‘Father Graham,'” he facetiously added. In this same talk, Graham stated:

“Finally, the way of salvation has not changed. I know how the ending of the book will be. The gospel that built this school and the gospel that brings me here tonight is still the way to salvation” (11/22/67, The Gastonia Gazette).

Compare this to Graham’s statement in 1957, when he branded the Catholic gospel, “a stench in the nostrils of God” (A Prophet With Honor, p. 223).

–  In 1968, Graham was in a meeting in San Antonio, Texas. He said that the Roman Church had given “tremendous cooperation” in areas where he had held crusades. He added, “A great part of our support today comes from Catholics. We never hold a crusade without priests and nuns being much in evidence in the audience.”

In 1985, the Paulist National Catholic Evangelization Association and Tyndale House Publishers jointly published What Christians Can Learn from One Another about Evangelizing Adults, which contained a chapter by Billy Graham. The book called for greater cooperation between Protestants and Catholics in so-called evangelism, and also included articles by Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Robert Schuller, Bill Bright, Jack Wyrtzen, and others (Flirting With Rome, Vol. I: Billy Graham, p. 31).

–  Thirty-four Roman Catholic churches and 300-400 parish volunteers participated in the Graham Evangelistic Association St. Louis Crusade led by Graham associate, Dr. Ralph Bell, September 22-29, 1991. The crusade was co-sponsored by the Archdiocese of St. Louis. (Reported in the 1992 March-April Fundamentalist Digest.) Vincent Heier of the Archdiocese office commented, “Billy Graham has always been very ecumenical … Billy Graham has not necessarily pushed people into one denomination or another but he’s tries to encourage whatever denominations that want to cooperate.”

–  David Briggs, an Associated Press reporter, wrote concerning the 9/22/91 Billy Graham New York City Crusade that “many of those who answer the call at the end of his crusade have been swayed by techniques such as having the ushers come forward to give the impression there is a groundswell of people committing to Christ.” (Reported in The Patriot-News, Religion section, Harrisburg, PA, 9/20/91, p. 1.) The rally was endorsed by Roman Catholic Cardinal John O’Connor who said, “the Billy Graham organization has asked our help in providing people to counsel and to welcome back those who wish to practice their Catholic faith.” At the rally, Graham thanked O’Connor and the area archbishops for their support. Graham also expressed appreciation to the Jewish Rabbis in New York. (Graham said: “I want to thank the Jewish Rabbis for having me for lunch. … About 200 Rabbis gathered and we broke bread together and we talked about the things of God and the things of New York City.”) When extending the invitation at the close of his message, Graham invited individuals to “come back to the Lord” by “renewing” their “vows of baptism or confirmation.” (Reported in the 1992 March-April Fundamentalist Digest.) [Graham made this same appeal to “reconfirm” at a 1977 Crusade held in the heart of Roman Catholicism at Notre Dame University: “Many of you want to come tonight to reconfirm your confirmation. You want to reconfirm the decision that you made when you joined the church” (Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute, pp. 75-76).]

–  Graham first preached in Moscow in 1982 when it was still part of the Soviet Union. When Graham returned to Russia for a 10/23/92-10/25/92 rally, he met with Russian Orthodox Church spokesman, Patriarch Alexi II, and issued a joint statement denouncing proselytizing in the former Soviet Union (July-August 1993, Fundamentalist Digest). Graham and Alexi issued the statement in a private meeting at Moscow’s historic Danilov Monastery. Graham said:

“I assured him we didn’t come here to proselytize, that I have been here a number of times with the Orthodox church as their guest, that I have a great love for the church and believe the people need to go back to their roots and put a great deal of emphasis on Bible study.” (Reported in the 12/92 ,Baptist Challenge.) (Emphasis added.)

Street preaching, distribution of Bible tracts and other Gospel literature, and publishing of Bible- related materials by foreign missionaries have also been banned in Russia. The restrictions were pushed by the same Russian Orthodox denomination that Graham has such “a great love” for. Graham voiced his agreement with the new laws, describing tract distribution as an “inappropriate” activity.

–  The 1998 animated film on the life of Moses, The Prince of Egypt, was made with input from evangelicals, Jews, and Muslims. The anti-God filmmaker, DreamWorks, taking great care not to offend these religious groups, took considerable liberties with the Biblical account. It pressured an evangelical publisher, working on a children’s book tie-in, to eliminate references to God as “he” and some references to God as “Lord” (12/98, What In The World!). To meet politically correct feminist criteria for an acceptable god, it has YHWH saying, “… I am the God of your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God of Sara, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah” (12/98, Media Spotlight). Billy Graham, James Dobson, and Jerry Falwell were also consulted, and all praise the movie. (Reported in the 1/15/99, Calvary Contender.)

–  Christianity Today reported on Graham’s third Pittsburgh Crusade, held from 6/2/93-6/6/93 (previous crusades were held in 1952 and 1968):

“The effort was marked by an ecumenical cooperation that saw 1,050 churches and 65 denominations come together. … 171,500 persons attended … 12,515 of them making commitments to Christ. … [Contributions came] in at $180,000 above the $1.45 million budget. … the Crusade in largely Roman Catholic Pittsburgh had six Catholics on the [Crusade] Executive Committee. Earlier crusades did not include invitations to Pittsburgh Catholic Diocese officials. This time Graham met with eight bishops and executives from Catholic and Protestant groups” (7/19/93 Christianity Today).

–  In 9/93, Graham held a crusade in Columbus, Ohio. In a pre-Crusade television interview, Graham said (speaking of the people of Columbus, Ohio):

“You’re too good, you don’t need evangelism. … In fact, that’s what kept us from coming [to Columbus] for so long.”

A TV news reporter said Graham didn’t care what faith you were from, that “the idea is to bring you back to your faith, no matter what it is, and to use the Crusade as a catalyst to bring you back to that faith.” Another reporter said: “The Catholic Church … is taking an active part … and is inviting its parishioners to attend the crusades” (9/19/93 ,Columbus Dispatch).

Graham, in his final 9/26 sermon to 44,000 people, asked: “Is AIDS a judgment from God? I cannot say for sure, but I think so.” Two weeks later he said he didn’t mean it. He said: “To say God has judged people with AIDS would be very wrong and very cruel” and “I would like to say that I am very sorry for what I said” (10/10/93, Bloomington Herald-Times). Graham also told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, “I don’t believe that, and I don’t know why I said it.”

–  In a five-day visit to North Korea in 3/92, Graham preached in one Protestant and one Catholic church (the only two churches permitted to exist in North Korea!). He delivered a message from the Pope, and spoke with government approval. He praised North Korea’s Marxist dictator Kim II Sung’s call for “reconciliation and peace,” and Graham said that he has “learned to appreciate Korea’s long struggle to preserve its national sovereignty.” On ABC’s “Good Morning America” (4/6/92), talking about his trip, Graham said that the people of North Korea seemed “relaxed and happy,” noting that they were preparing for Kim’s 80th birthday, of whom Graham said was almost like “a grandfather” to his people! Graham said that Kim had given the Graham party “a very lavish luncheon” during which he was “very warm and friendly.” But, said Graham, he had no idea why he was invited to North Korea.

“Well, I have an idea,” says John Lofton of The Lofton Letter: “Graham is invited to such places as North Korea and the then Communist Soviet Union because he is a Dupe, what Lenin called ‘a useful idiot’ who can be counted on to not tell it like it is.” Graham’s trip was obviously of immense propaganda value to atheist North Korea, which recently joined the United Nations, and is now contracting to sell powerful “terror weapons” to Iran. (Reported in the 5/1/92 Calvary Contender and the 2/22/93 Christian News.) [Graham has always seemed to have a higher view of communism than of Scripture. A number of years ago Graham said that “Mao Tse Tung’s Eight Precepts are basically the same as the Ten Commandments. In fact, if we can’t have the Ten Commandments read in the schools, I’ll settle for Mao’s Precepts” (Gothardism Evaluated, 1988, p. 16).]

–  Graham is a supporter of the Williamsburg Charter Foundation [WCF] (Graham gave the keynote address at the signing ceremony on 6/25/88), an ecumenical amalgamation of professing Christians, humanists, atheists, New Agers, Eastern religionists, etc., whose stated goal is religious tolerance in education, but all the while is promoting a new one world religion. Other “evangelical” signators and/or supporters with Graham were James Dobson, Beverly LaHaye, and Chuck Colson. [WCF no longer exists, but the curriculum has been passed on to a “new” organization, “The First Liberty Institute,” an organization headed up by New Ager Dr. Charles C. Haynes. (First Liberty is located at George Mason University, which was originally designated as “national teacher training and outreach center” for the Williamsburg Charter Foundation. Its New Age/One World curriculum, “Living With Our Deepest Differences: Religious Liberty in a Pluralistic Society,” is being offered to the nations’ public schools by the National Council on Religion and Public Education, a Liberty Institute organization, and has been accepted by the California State Board of Education.)]

–  A 1993 article from the Houston Chronicle quoted Billy Graham’s favorable comments about left wing liberal President(s) Bill & Hillary Clinton:

“President Bill Clinton would make a great evangelist, the Rev. Billy Graham told U.S. News & World Report in a recent interview. … Graham said he was impressed with Clinton’s charisma and ‘with some of the things he believes. … From a biblical point of view, we should be headed in the direction of goodness and righteousness, away from crime and immorality,’ Graham said, ‘and towards one’s neighbors who are in need. I’m encouraged by the emphasis President Clinton and Hillary are putting on that.'”

Like what? Putting homosexuals in the military or helping to abort your neighbor’s baby? Or perhaps Clinton’s enthusiasm towards the New World Order? That Graham should have any kind words at all for a couple who represent the antithesis of Biblical “goodness,” “righteousness,” and “morality” is bad enough, but for Graham to think that the Clintons are emphasizing these virtues exhibits a heretofore unprecedented level of ignorance and/or self-deceit on Graham’s part.

Graham attended a 1993 prayer breakfast in which Clinton participated. Senator Kerry read Jn. 3:1-21 (skipping verse 16) and said Christ was speaking of “spiritual renewal” and that “in the spirit of Christ … Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Jew, Christian” were meeting and “there is renewal … with a new President and Vice President …” Billy Graham added, “I do not know a time when we had a more spiritual time than we’ve had today.”

[On the 3/5/98 “Today Show,” Graham said about Clinton’s sexual escapades: “I forgive him because I know the frailty of human nature and I know how hard it is, and especially a strong vigorous young man like he is — he has such a tremendous personality. I think the ladies just go wild over him.”]

–  More evidence of Graham’s ecumenism is his statement in U.S. News & World Report (12/19/88):

“World travel and getting to know clergy of all denominations has helped mold me into an ecumenical being. We’re separated by theology and, in some instances, culture and race, but all of that means nothing to me anymore.”

This should not surprise us in light of the fact that as early as 1958, Graham had reduced the doctrine of verbal inerrancy to the status of mere “theory,” and denied that “this particular theory of inspiration” was even essential to Christian orthodoxy, let alone grounds for the breaking of Christian fellowship. (Billy Graham’s letter to the editor, 11/58, Eternity magazine, pp. 18-19.)

–  A pastor who attended a Billy Graham crusade on September 22, 1990, in Nassau Coliseum on Long Island, reported his experience as follows:

“I have read often of the compromises of Billy Graham, but doubted some of the stories as exaggerated. Now they have been proven, in my eyes, worse than reported. … My conclusion is that Billy Graham is making men twofold more the child of hell … The emphasis was on believing in God, with a little commentary on Jesus Christ, but very little. … We were told that the way to take care of the sin problem is to ‘receive Christ, rededicate your life, or renew your confirmation vows, or whatever you call it in your church.’ I could hardly believe my ears. What do confirmation vows have to do with salvation? … No one could have convinced me of the apostasy of Billy Graham any more than my own experience. … He even had a Rabbi on the platform to show the unity of the religions. … Not having competent counselors is bad enough, but then to have led them to believe that a church experience is the same as being born again is the height of apostasy. … Billy has not compromised, he has gone kaput!” (From The Baptist Lighthouse, reprinted in The Perilous Times, March, 1991.)

–  During the early-1991 Gulf War with Iraq, Billy Graham was summoned to the White House to pray with and for President George Bush. Graham has said that Bush is the best friend he has in the world outside his own staff, and said that out of the war perhaps “will come a new peace and, as … stated by the president, a new world order” (2/4/91, Christian News). (Emphasis added.)

–  More evidence of Graham conforming to the world was his organization asking for a PG (Parental Guidance) rating for the film, The Prodigal. This request was “so it wouldn’t be seen as a goody- two-shoes ‘religious’ movie” (4/90, Focus on the Family magazine). “Such primary/pragmatic concern for worldly image compromises [any] possible secondary spiritual benefits [the film might have had]” (2/15/91, Calvary Contender).

–  In Amsterdam in 1986, sponsored by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Crusade at a cost of $21 million, more than 12,000 “Christian” leaders met to plan a strategy for evangelizing the world. Graham openly admitted at the closing press conference that the only way to achieve world evangelism is under the umbrella of ecumenicity. When asked how he could conduct a conference on worldwide evangelism when so many attending groups did not even embrace the same fundamentals of the faith or agree on the definition of the Gospel, Graham responded:

“Evangelism is about the only word we can unite on … Our methods would be different and there would be debates over even the message sometimes, but there is no debate over the fact that we need to evangelize. … I think there is an ecumenicity that cannot [be gotten] under any other umbrella.”

Thus, Graham has chosen to join in evangelism with those who would debate the very content of the Gospel! (Reported in the July 1991 CIB Bulletin and the March-May 1991 Foundation, p. 13.)

–  Billy Graham was named as one of the four Honorary Co-Chairmen of the A.D. 2000 Evangelism organization. (The other three are Luis Palau, Campus Crusade’s Bill Bright, and Kyun Chik Han of Korea. Paul Cedar, then head of the Evangelical Free Church, chairs the A.D. 2000 International Coalition of Christian Leaders, which is composed of 200 key leaders from various denominations, national, and local churches.) A.D. 2000 Evangelism is ecumenical, compromising to the core, and even has some New Agers in its ranks (e.g., Jay Gary and Robert Muller), yet many undiscerning or uninformed “believers” are supporting, praising, and participating in it. This unscriptural evangelism movement includes Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Charismatics, Pentecostals, and Protestants of all kinds. It is evident that many have not yet realized the impossibility of evangelizing the world when millions of those participating in that effort preach a false gospel. This makes the A.D. 2000 Evangelism program a curse, not a blessing.

According to the July-August, 1993 Mission Frontiers Bulletin, “These International Coalition leaders share the vision of the A.D. 2000 and Beyond Movement. [“A church for every people and the Gospel for every person by A.D. 2000,” is their slogan.] They are ‘front line’ leaders, implementers, activists, equippers, and/or mobilizers in the ministry of world evangelization. Coalition members give leadership to the involvement of their own constituencies and share spiritual counsel with the various A.D. 2000 boards, committees and resource network leaders. They will seek to rally support and resources of all kinds to see the objectives of the movement fulfilled.” (Emphasis added.) Seeking “all kinds” of support simply means that they will utilize whatever group claims to be in agreement with their “objectives” of global evangelization. The problem with such an inclusivist policy, however, is that some of the groups whose support they are trying to enlist embrace many unbiblical beliefs and strange gospels (September-October 1993, Foundation magazine).

–  In preparation for an ecumenical evangelistic crusade that was held in Germany in March of 1993, Graham met with leading German governmental and religious officials. Among those with whom he met was Bishop Karl Lehmann, the “highest-ranking Roman Catholic official in the country.” The purpose of their meeting was “to extend the opportunity for local dioceses to participate in the outreach of the crusade.” According to the report, “Bishop Lehmann warmly welcomed Mr. Graham stating, ‘One of the key words uniting us today, including Orthodox, Protestant and Catholic alike is ‘evangelism.'” (1/93, Decision magazine, p. 19)

[Those who fellowship with Romanism put a stamp of approval — unwittingly, perhaps, but just as surely — upon the false gospel preached by their Roman Catholic friends. When Billy Graham includes Catholics in his evangelistic crusades and sends inquirers to Catholic churches, those looking on are made to think that Roman Catholicism must be true Christianity. When evangelical leaders fellowship with Rome, a climate is created whereby it is very difficult to preach that Catholics need to be saved and leave their apostate [church]. Ecumenical evangelicals break down the walls between truth and error and muddy the waters of gospel work. …” (Reported in the 7/1/93 ,Calvary Contender, quoting Way of Life Literature).]

–  After numerous letters from the editor of Christian News questioning Graham’s alleged Masonic affiliations, a staff member of Graham’s ministry denied that Graham was ever a Freemason. (In a weakly worded statement, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association “condemned” Freemasonry on the grounds that the church should meet the needs one is trying to satisfy by joining a lodge, that joining a lodge could cause a rift between husband and wife if they had not mutually agreed on the husband’s lodge membership, and the requirement to take an oath violates Scripture.) But Graham’s ministry also admitted that Graham attended a 33rd degree initiation rite back in 1966. Graham’s defenders claim that this is how he became alerted to the dangers of Freemasonry.

But Masons are not in the habit of inviting the curious to its secret ceremonies! Can one then surmise that this was Graham’s own initiation ceremony? In doing primary research for his book, The Origins and Teachings of Freemasonry (at the House of the Temple in Washington, D.C.), Dr. Robert A. Morey was told that they keep a file on all 33rd degree Masons. Morey asked if they had a file on Billy Graham. The Librarian said, “Yes. Do you want to see it?” But since he did not feel that it was proper, he said, “No, not at this time” (Robert Morey’ letter to the editor, Christian News, 9/14/92).

Fritz Springmeier of Portland, Oregon has written a tract, “Billy Graham and the Bible.” He gives evidence of Billy Graham being a 33rd degree Mason who has taken secret oaths in blood. In this tract, Springmeier states, “Billy Graham took part in the initiation rites of Jim Shaw as a 33rd degree Mason. This was before Shaw left the Masons in obedience to Christ” (9/14/92, Christian News).

–  William Martin, a sociologist at Rice University, spent five years researching for an authorized biography of Graham (A Prophet With Honor: The Billy Graham Story, 1991 — this was the second authorized biography of Graham, the other being by John Pollock in 1966). Martin characterizes Graham as a “regular guy who can skinny-dip with Lyndon Johnson or flip through Playboy at a barber shop without embarrassment. But he is also an example of clean living.” Other observations by Martin include:

(a) Graham’s form of Christianity relies upon emotion and a simplistic view of the Bible in favor of a mass-produced approach to gaining converts.

(b) Graham is willing to tread carelessly along the line separating religion and politics in exchange for access to the rich and powerful.

(c) Studies have found that Graham’s rallies largely preach to the professing converted, and that many of those who answer the call at the end of his crusades have been swayed by techniques, such as having ushers come forward in order to give the impression that there is a groundswell of people committing to Christ.

(d) Graham has been vilified for his willingness to work in cooperation with mainline Protestants, Catholics, and others of suspect faith.

(e) Graham has publicly endorsed Martin Luther King, a known womanizer and Marxist sympathizer.

(f) Graham’s ecumenical achievements include the founding of the neo-evangelical magazine Christianity Today, and the founding of the ecumenical youth organization, Youth for Christ, as well as having been an important cog in the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) since its early days.

–  Graham visited the NCC’s (National Council of Churches) headquarters in New York City on 8/27/91 and praised the group as follows: “There’s no group of people in the world that I would rather be with right now than you all. Because I think of you, I pray for you, and we follow with great interest the things you do. … I don’t speak to too many church assemblies any more because I consider myself as belonging to all the churches. And I love everybody equally and I have no problem in fellowship with anybody who says that Jesus Christ is Lord. This has been a great relief to me to come to that conclusion about twenty-some years ago.” (As reported in Foundation, June-August 1991, p. 34.) [At the 1995 NCC convention, NCC General Secretary Joan Brown Campbell read a letter from Graham encouraging the board — “May God use your efforts to bring about a renewed understanding of the priority of evangelism, and rededication to the practice of biblical evangelism within the churches you serve.”]

–  For decades Billy Graham has had a love for the Charismatic movement and has supported it. His photo appears on the cover of the Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship magazine, Voice, for October 1962, after he spoke at their convention that year in Seattle. It was Billy Graham who was instrumental in bringing Oral Roberts into the mainstream of evangelical sympathy. He invited Oral to the World Congress on Evangelism sponsored by Christianity Today magazine in Berlin in late 1966, then spoke at the dedication of Oral Roberts University in April of 1967.

Graham has also appeared on TV specials with Oral Roberts. There has never been a word of protest or warning about Roberts’ wild visions, faith healing, and shameless money-raising schemes. At Graham’s Amsterdam ’83, two of the main speakers were David Yonggi Cho of Korea and Pat Robertson of the USA. Both, of course, are outspoken charismatics (New Neutralism II, p. 30).

Billy Graham’s love affair with the Charismatic movement continues today. He sent his greetings and blessing to the hyper-charismatic gathering at the “New Orleans ’87 North American Congress on the Holy Spirit & World Evangelization” via a video clip which was introduced with much fanfare and shown on large screens. When asked to send greetings, he should have been honest and said, “How in the world can God bless that mess”! Instead, though, he said this: (Reported in an O Timothy Special Issue, “Charismatic Confusion in Indianapolis.”)

“Greetings in the name of the Lord! I would love to be with you today in your great conference. But I am unable to do so because we are involved in a crusade here in Denver, Colorado … I rejoice with you at the goals of your … Congress … And I thank God for the vital role that your movement is having in bringing about a spiritual awakening in this country … My prayers are with you that your Congress will be greatly blessed of God and used by the Holy Spirit to further the Good News of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. May God bless you all.” [!!!]

–  A highly influential book promoting the charismatic “Manifest Sons of God” doctrine is Destined For the Throne by Paul E. Billheimer. In a chapter titled, “God’s purpose for the Church,” regarding the extension of the Godhead, Billheimer wrote: “The Union goes beyond a mere formal, functional or idealistic harmony or rapport. It is an ‘organic relationship of personalities’; through the new birth we become bona fide members of the original, cosmic family. …” Billheimer claims he received his “insights” by personal ministry of the “Holy Spirit.” He concludes, “Thus through the new birth-and I speak reverently — we become the ‘next of kin’ to the Trinity, a kind of ‘extension’ of the Godhead.” Charismaniacs Jan and Paul Crouch of TBN mailed out hundreds of thousands of this book in 1985 and 1986. Even now they send it out as a fund raiser. The foreword to the book was written by Billy Graham. (Reported in Bold Truth News.)

–  Billy Graham has also taken the “low road” with respect to pop psychological gospel being espoused by so many of today’s leading “evangelicals.” Two examples follow:

(a) Graham endorsed the Life Application Bible (along with Charles Stanley, Howard Hendricks, and D. James Kennedy), a study Bible with study notes in support of self-love and other humanistic concepts (e.g., study note to Rom. 12:3 — “Healthy self-esteem is important because some of us think too little of ourselves … the key to an honest and accurate evaluation is knowing the basis of our self-worth — our identity in Christ …”; and Gen. 1:26 — “Knowing that we are made in God’s image, and thus share many of His characteristics, provides a solid basis for self-worth … Because we bear God’s image, we can feel positive about ourselves … Knowing you are a person of worth helps you love God …”). Graham is quoted as saying that, “The Life Application Bible is a great step forward in helping Christians apply the Bible’s life-changing message in their lives.”

(b) Graham states in his book, Answers to Life’s Problems, “… faith in God is very, very important,” but apparently not enough — “God may choose to use an able psychiatrist to help you with some of the problems you are facing … Therefore, you should not feel that you are wrong in seeking the help of a psychiatrist or trained psychologist if that will help you deal with some deep- seated emotional problems. Seek one who will not discourage your faith in God. Your pastor can perhaps suggest a Christian psychiatrist in your area.”

–  Eugene Peterson’s The Message has swept into Christian bookstores, homes, and churches from coast to coast. In the first four months after its mid-July, 1993 release, 100,000 copies of this “New Testament in contemporary English” were printed by NavPress and 70,000 books were sold. Apparently, most readers were delighted: “The Message is so good it leaves me breathless,” wrote popular New Age author Madeleine L’Engle in her endorsement. Billy Graham has also endorsed The Message: “The Message is one of the most dynamic recent versions of the New Testament that I have seen … Children can easily understand it, and veteran Bible readers will see Christ’s words in a fresh light.” In fact, Billy Graham even authorized a special edition of The Message to be distributed by his Evangelistic Association — it contains “… many explanations that I’ve written to help you understand what the New Testament says.”

But The Message teaches a different gospel and a different morality than the Bible (as well as a worldly/warm fuzzy view of life). For example, The Message translates Jesus’ statement in John 14:28, “The Father is the goal and purpose of my life,” versus the Bible’s “… The Father is greater than I.” In l Cor. 6:18-20, the words “sexual immorality” are deleted and the words “avoids commitment and intimacy” are added. (One could conclude that “commitment and intimacy,” not marriage, set the boundaries for acceptable sex.) In Rom. 1:26-27, the words “God gave them over …” are deleted and words that qualify homosexuality are added (providing a loophole for committed homosexuals who “love” each other; thus lust becomes the sin, not the choice of a same-sex partner). There are hundreds of examples like these in The Message.

Peterson himself, in his introduction to The Message, says, “This version of the New Testament in a contemporary idiom keeps the language of The Message current and fresh and understandable in the same language in which we do our shopping, talk with our friends, worry about world affairs, and teach our children their table manners …” This all sounds like an excuse for “dumbing-down” Scripture to match our culture’s downward trends. Should we then rewrite God’s holy Scriptures to fit our more shallow and worldly communications? And what does it say about a man like Billy Graham when he endorses it as an authentic translation of the Bible rather than as Peterson’s personal, politically correct interpretation. (Also endorsing The Message were Warren Wiersbe, J.I. Packer, and Jack Hayford.) [Adapted from “What Kind of Message is THE MESSAGE?, an article by Berit Kjos.]

–  Regardless of which of the Bible versions a true Bible-believer might choose to use, all can agree that The Living Bible is not an acceptable “translation.” In July 1996 the New Living Translation (NLT) by Tyndale House Publishers came out as a remake of Kenneth Taylor’s The Living Bible, which first appeared in a complete Bible in 1971 and which has sold more than 40 million copies. The advertisements tell us that “The New Living Translation provides a wonderful balance of readability and authority. … due to the careful work of 90 leading Bible scholars, it is accurate to the original Greek and Hebrew text.” The cover jacket of the NLT contains enthusiastic recommendations by Billy Graham, Bill Hybels, and Josh McDowell, and was featured positively in the 10/28/96 edition of Christianity Today in an article, “The Living Bible Reborn.”

In truth, the NLT is a more worthless version than The Living Bible ever was. It is again a paraphrase, like The Living Bible, but its updating of the language and phrase additions make a mockery of the Word of God.

–  Promise Keepers is the gigantic new (1991) “men’s movement” among professing evangelical Christians. Its roots are Catholic and charismatic to the core. PK’s contradictory stand on homosexuality; its promotion of secular psychology; its unscriptural feminizing of men; its depiction of Jesus as a “phallic messiah” tempted to perform homosexual acts; and its ecumenical and unbiblical teachings should dissuade any true Christian from participating. Promise Keepers is proving to be one of the most ungodly and misleading movements in the annals of Christian history. Nevertheless, Billy Graham is a supporter of this ecumenical, charismatic, psychologized men’s movement. Graham relayed to everyone at the February, 1996, PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta that PK is “the organization that helps the church work,” and needs to “tear down the walls that separate us.”

–  Foundation magazine seems to adequately sum up the case against Billy Graham:

“Fifty years of compromise have increased Billy Graham’s popularity but have resulted in a serious loss of spiritual discernment and Scriptural convictions. Fifty years of compromise have brought Billy Graham into close fellowship and cooperation with millions of those who preach a false gospel and teach dangerous, unscriptural doctrines. His refusal to warn about the false gospel preached by the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant churches is inexcusable and indefensible. His failure to warn about the dangers of the wildfire teachings of charismatic leaders opens the door for millions of believers to be deceived. Fifty years of compromise have even led Billy Graham into joining with leaders of pagan, heathen religions on the basis of a mutual search for world peace” (March- May 1991 Foundation, p. 16).

Posted in catholicism, Christianity, church corruption, john mccain, judgment, masonry, politics, spiritual deception, TBN, trinity broadcasting network | Comments Off on Billy Graham Apostasy Exposed

The New North American Union State: America, Mexico, And Canada Together

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=North_American_Union

Posted in America, George Bush, illegal immigration, immigration, politics | Comments Off on The New North American Union State: America, Mexico, And Canada Together

Independence Now And Forever!

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070703.html

On this Independence Day, it behooves us to recall the principles of
America’s founding, especially in light of the ongoing attempt by
today’s political and commercial leaders to merge the United States
into a hemispheric government. In fact, the clarion call for
independence is just as fundamental, just as revolutionary as it was
230 years ago.

Regarding the signing of the Declaration of Independence John Adams
said, “[Independence Day] will be the most memorable epoch in the
history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by
succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to
be commemorated as the Day of Deliverance by solemn acts of devotion
to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with
shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations, from
one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward
forevermore.”

Adams went on to say, “You will think me transported with enthusiasm,
but I am not. I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that
it will cost us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend
these States. Yet through all the gloom I can see the rays of
ravishing light and glory; I can see that the end is more than worth
all the means, that posterity will triumph in that day’s transaction,
even though we should rue it, which I trust in God we shall not.”

Indeed, the signers of America’s Declaration of Independence endured
the sacrifice of toil and blood. Pertaining to the lives of the
signers, David Limbaugh writes, “Of those 56 who signed the
Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during
the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal
treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his
thirteen children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one
time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes.
Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost
everything they owned.”

Yes, America’s Declaration of Independence, which is our nation’s
birth certificate, was purchased at a very high price. Rightly did its
primary author, Thomas Jefferson, invoke God’s name no less than four
times in the Declaration. Without God, our struggle for independence
and freedom would have surely failed!

Jefferson, along with the vast majority of America’s founders, knew
that freedom was first the gift of God, not the accomplishment of men.
He further understood that man’s law must be subordinate to the
natural laws of God.

Therefore, with an appeal to Heaven for the “rectitude of [their]
intentions,” America’s Founding Fathers courageously forged a document
that would put their own lives at risk, but would also change the
course of history.

The question now is, “How long can we maintain our nation’s
independence?” The forces of global government seem to dominate both
major parties in Washington, D.C., most corporate boardrooms, and most
newsrooms (including the Fox News Channel).

In fact, hemispheric or regional government never had a more powerful
and committed ally than President George W. Bush. Mark my words, if
and when America loses its independence, it will have been G.W. Bush
that led the way in making it happen. I will even be so bold as to say
that G.W. Bush is the worst enemy American independence has had since
old King George III of England!

Even as I write, Bush is pushing forward with his intentions to merge
the United States into a trilateral government with Mexico and Canada.
This is why he lobbied so intently for the just-defeated amnesty bill
for illegal aliens. To George W. Bush, there is no such thing as an
illegal alien, because he has already agreed to unite the three
countries into one.

If the United States is going to maintain its independence and freedom
much beyond the year 2010 (the year Bush’s new North American Union is
scheduled to be in place), it will only be because millions of
freedom-loving Americans are willing to fight for it.

Both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson died on July 4, 1826. Daniel
Webster gave the eulogy for both men on August 2. Included in his
remarks on that notable day were these words: “It [the Declaration of
Independence] is my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God, it
shall be my dying sentiment. Independence now, and independence
forever.”

To Webster’s words, I say a hearty AMEN! I promise no loyalty to the
North American Union, to the United Nations, or to any other brand of
global government. When the day comes that I am required to submit to
any form of global authority, I will be an outlaw! There is no freedom
without independence, and there is no independence without eternal
vigilance. To my dying breath I will say with Daniel Webster,
“Independence now, and independence forever!”

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.

Posted in America, Christianity, politics | Comments Off on Independence Now And Forever!

What Is God’s Stance On Abortion?

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

http://spiritlessons.com/Documents/abortion/abortion.htm

There are a few who has exposed abortion.There are a great number of
hard christian bands that go back to a decade or two ago that dealt with
abortion and preached judgment on this country for this.There are quite
a few christian death metal bands that expose abortion as infanticide or
genocide of the unborn.I even have a video of one local band with the
song title DEAD UNBORN that showed some of this footage.It wasn’t quite
as graphic as the pictures on that site but you still got the idea.You
talk about hypocrisy.The father of one of this band’s members is a
baptist that actually performs abortions.I can’t recall if he said that
he was a minister or not,but it wouldn’t surprise me if he was.I
know,there are things like this that is so unbelieveable.But we have
hypocrites on the pulpit like John Hagee that may preach against
abortion but refuses to hold Bush responsible.I know one site I came
across said that all who voted for Bush will have the blood of these
aborted babies on their hands.I don’t think that is us because we are
speaking out now and have truely repented.Before I was fooled and also
coherced (mostly out of fear of the other guy getting in
because I was real reluctant even at Bush’s relection).  So even before the Terri Schiavo incident I wasn’t lockstep but it
was that incident that really woke me up to Bush’s evil. I  couldn’t
believe then how silent the churches were about this. Just like recently
the church has been totally silent about Bush while he tried to
overthrow this country with illegals.Don’t be fooled at all by that bill
being defeated.Bush is still going forward with the north america union
and congress seems to be in lockstep with him on this.I had written my
congresswoman,who is basically a liberal republican about this bogus
union as well as overturning Roe V. Wade.So I did what I could for the
sake of the unborn.This right here also goes to show the hypocrisy by
how the american people were intolerant of the illegal issue yet not
about abortion.If the church were true they would be rallying their
congregations to flood our representatives to overturn Roe V. Wade.I
don’t hear of this happening.It goes to show the wicked hearts of all
the churches and religious leaders who don’t strongly oppose this
abomination.

Posted in abortion, America, judgment, judgment on America | Comments Off on What Is God’s Stance On Abortion?

George Bush Using Drugs to Control Depression, Erratic Behavior

Posted by soldierservant on July 15, 2007

This is proof that Bush is a lunatic. He is a druggie. It is amazing how much about all this ties in with Hitler and naziism,involving drugs and the occult. Any opening you give to Satan he will blow all out of proportion and is why everything is such a mess. Now even though there is a lot of debate over how christian or how occultic this nation originated our forefathers seemed like they had a lot more common sense than most do these days. Common sense is the endangered species. One of the founders, James Madison, said that if tyranny or oppression ever come to this land that it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Wow, how true that seems to be. The more I find out about a lot of the past wars hardly none were righteous wars. Like in WW2 one of the cities that was nuked in Japan, Nagasaki was a dominately christian city.That makes you think about the harlot of Babylon being drunk on the blood of the martyrs. I think we are the Great Babylon. There is very little room for doubt about that.Those that claim that they know our
true history and history of our forefathers are liars because they totally ignore the sayings like that of James Madison. They claim that WW2 was our greatest generation and totally righteous war shows you just how ignorant or what liars they are.Our presidents were in league with Hitler. There were movements of naziism in this country during that time. This is proof how widespread this love of falsehood is. This article of the link below will really offend the Bushbots so be careful if you think about forwarding this to some of them. But definitely post this. This is not the first time I have heard of Bush’s erratic
behavior. This arcticle confirms what I have heard elsewhere. But anyone can look at how he runs things and can’t defend that his actions are that of a sane person.I think his wickedness is catching up with him and Satan is going to come and collect his soul soon, just as he did with Hitler.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=2094

President George W. Bush is taking powerful anti-depressant drugs to control his erratic behavior, depression and paranoia, Capitol Hill Blue has learned.

The prescription drugs, administered by Col. Richard J. Tubb, the White House physician, can impair the President’s mental faculties and decrease both his physical capabilities and his ability to respond to a crisis, administration aides admit privately.

“It’s a double-edged sword,” says one aide. “We can’t have him flying off the handle at the slightest provocation but we also need a President who is alert mentally.”

Tubb prescribed the anti-depressants after a clearly-upset Bush stormed off stage on July 8, refusing to answer reporters’ questions about his relationship with indicted Enron executive Kenneth J. Lay.

“Keep those motherfuckers away from me,” he screamed at an aide backstage. “If you can’t, I’ll find someone who can.”

Bush’s mental stability has become the topic of Washington whispers in recent months. Capitol Hill Blue first reported on June 4 about increasing concern among White House aides over the President’s wide mood swings and obscene outbursts.

Although GOP loyalists dismissed the reports an anti-Bush propaganda, the reports were later confirmed by prominent George Washington University psychiatrist Dr. Justin Frank in his book <>Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President<>. Dr. Frank diagnosed the President as a “paranoid meglomaniac” and “untreated alcoholic” whose “lifelong streak of sadism, ranging from childhood pranks (using firecrackers to explode frogs) to insulting journalists, gloating over state executions and pumping his hand gleefully before the bombing of Baghdad” showcase Bush’s instabilities.

“I was really very unsettled by him and I started watching everything he did and reading what he wrote and watching him on videotape. I felt he was disturbed,” Dr. Frank said. “He fits the profile of a former drinker whose alcoholism has been arrested but not treated.”

Dr. Frank’s conclusions have been praised by other prominent psychiatrists, including Dr. James Grotstein, Professor at UCLA Medical Center, and Dr. Irvin Yalom, MD, Professor Emeritus at Stanford University Medical School.

The doctors also worry about the wisdom of giving powerful anti-depressant drugs to a person with a history of chemical dependency. Bush is an admitted alcoholic, although he never sought treatment in a formal program, and stories about his cocaine use as a younger man haunted his campaigns for Texas governor and his first campaign for President.

“President Bush is an untreated alcoholic with paranoid and megalomaniac tendencies,” Dr. Frank adds.

The White House did not return phone calls seeking comment on this article.

Although the exact drugs Bush takes to control his depression and behavior are not known, White House sources say they are “powerful medications” designed to bring his erratic actions under control. While Col. Tubb regularly releases a synopsis of the President’s annual physical, details of the President’s health and any drugs or treatment he may receive are not public record and are guarded zealously by the secretive cadre of aides that surround the President.

Veteran White House watchers say the ability to control information about Bush’s health, either physical or mental, is similar to Ronald Reagan’s second term when aides managed to conceal the President’s increasing memory lapses that signaled the onslaught of Alzheimer’s Disease.

It also brings back memories of Richard Nixon’s final days when the soon-to-resign President wondered the halls and talked to portraits of former Presidents. The stories didn’t emerge until after Nixon left office.

One long-time GOP political consultant who – for obvious reasons – asked not to be identified said he is advising his Republican Congressional candidates to keep their distance from Bush.

“We have to face the very real possibility that the President of the United States is loony tunes,” he says sadly. “That’s not good for my candidates, it’s not good for the party and it’s certainly not good for the country.”
© Copyright 2004 by Capitol Hill Blue
www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4921.shtml

Also see:
Angry Bush Walks Out on Media
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=2020

Washington Shrink Calls Bush a “Paranoid, Sadistic Meglomaniac”
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1942

Bush’s Erratic Behaviour Worries White House Aides
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1901

Voice of the White House, June 10-14, 2004
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1940

Voice of the White House – May 31 to June 4, 2004
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1914

Voice of the White House May 31, 2004
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1909

Voice of the White House
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1871

Notes from Inside the White House
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1806

Posted in George Bush, GOP, judgment, judgment on America, media, politics, Republican | Comments Off on George Bush Using Drugs to Control Depression, Erratic Behavior