At Pentagon Christmas Service, Franklin Graham Praises ‘God of War’ “We know that God loves. But did you know that God also hates?"

So just to recap Franklin Graham preached a standard sermon about how God hates sin and that the wages of sin is death. That God sent the army Israel to strike down sinners. And that Christ was born to be put to death to pay the debt of sin for all whom accept God's sacrificial gift of salvation.

Franklin Graham did not say anything in regard to America going to war against anyone. It wasn't any kind of battle cry. No rallying the troops to war. Just a soft spoken standard message about salvation, which he and his father Billy Graham have preached going back nearly 90 years.

Servus said:

So just to recap Franklin Graham preached a standard sermon about how God hates sin and that the wages of sin is death. That God sent the army Israel to strike down sinners. And that Christ was born to be put to death to pay the debt of sin for all whom accept God's sacrificial gift of salvation.

Franklin Graham did not say anything in regard to America going to war against anyone. It wasn't any kind of battle cry. No rallying the troops to war. Just a soft spoken standard message about salvation, which he and his father Billy Graham have preached going back nearly 90 years.

Click to expand...

Based on the article linked in the OP quoting Graham's words. I didn't see a "standard message about salvation".

"God remembers. And I think of the sins of our country, and I pray that God will forgive the sins of our country. That when you think of all the things that we do and the mistakes that we make, pray that God will heal our land and that America, once again, will turn to the God of our fathers and serve him."

Click to expand...

The thing is that I would actually agree with Graham--to a point. I pray that God will forgive the sins of our country. I do question if Franklin Graham is talking about the same things I would be when talking about America's national sins.

"America, once again, will turn to the God of our fathers and serve him" is a funny line.

When was this? To turn again to God means that there was a point where that was true. When was that? At what period was America a nation living in faithful worship and service to God?

There's more than one reason why this makes no sense.

1) America has always been a nation of diverse religious beliefs, and even non-religious beliefs.

2) True worship of God, as laid down in the pages of Scripture, involves more than mere lip-service, "These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from Me". So if we were to examine the actions and attitudes of the US, past and present, would we actually discover true worship of God at the national level? The answer, of course, is no. From this nation's inception until the present day, this nation has had a deep, deep problem in merely recognizing the innate worth of other human beings made in God's Image. From America's cruelty toward those of African descent, to our genocidal conquest of the indigenous peoples; from our love of avarice and mammon, all the way to the present where our national spirit is one continually marked by cruelty, war-mongering, hatred of others, and the idolatrous adoration of wealth and power.

Lastly. America isn't Israel. This "turn to the God of our fathers" is invoking the prophetic language of Scripture about Israel returning to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This is a reconceptualization of America as a modern Israel, and treating our American forebearers with the same kind of reverence that Israel had for the biblical patriarchs. It's an attempt at sacralizing America as a nation, and the history of America as an analogue or spiritual successor to the Biblical Israel. Which is not only theologically ridiculous and upsetting, a faithful student of Scripture and someone with a meaningful commitment to the faithful confession of the Christian Church, to Jesus Christ, should never make--it's also just really weird.

No. This isn't some bog standard preaching of the Gospel. This is ethnocentrism being veiled behind a shallow appearance of preaching the Gospel.

The reason why Graham invokes the story of the Amalekites isn't to point out God's patience with us sinners and that by the love with which He loved us He sent His only-begotten Son. The reason isn't to address the substantive evil of America's acts of cruelty and violent savagery built upon racist foundations which insult the Image of God. It's a way of portraying the people Graham doesn't like as modern day Amalekites, and America will suffer unless it rids itself of them.

Why talk about the Amalekites, why talk about Saul's failure to eradicate them, why bring up how God waited for 400 years and then acted? Explain what that has to do with the Gospel. If it was about mentioning God's radical patience with sinners, there are certainly ways to do that--biblical ways. Scripture actually directly addresses God's radical patience in many places--the long-suffering of God who desires human beings turn away from cruel and evil ways. "Do I desire the death of the wicked, says the LORD, do I not instead desire that he repent and live?" "God is not slow in keeping His promises as some understand slowness. Instead He is patient with you, desiring that none perish but all come to repentance and live"

I can't imagine how disappointed and sad Billy Graham is, looking down from heaven, right now.

ViaCrucis said:

If the official government accounts had said "There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Prophet" instead of "Let the Earth receive her King" would you be okay with it?

Click to expand...

No of course not. Why would I? I would say its evidence that our country has fallen far from its Christian roots.

But the person still has a right to their religious expression, whether I like it or not. And I would have a right to my expression as well.

Pommer said:

The government of the United States of America is to hold no opinion on matters religious.
The personal beliefs of the office holders are safe (and sacrosanct); the Office, which these people hold, has no official “position” with regards to sectarian beliefs.

Click to expand...

And he is merely expressing a personal belief. Not the official position of the United States Government.

rjs330 said:

No of course not. Why would I? I would say its evidence that our country has fallen far from its Christian roots.

Click to expand...

What Christian roots? It has certainly strayed from its Enlightenment roots.

BCP1928 said:

What Christian roots? It has certainly strayed from its Enlightenment roots.

Click to expand...

Its Christian roots.

ViaCrucis said:

Based on the article linked in the OP quoting Graham's words. I didn't see a "standard message about salvation".

Click to expand...

Perhaps listing to the actual sermon might give better insight.

ViaCrucis said:

The thing is that I would actually agree with Graham--to a point. I pray that God will forgive the sins of our country. I do question if Franklin Graham is talking about the same things I would be when talking about America's national sins.

"America, once again, will turn to the God of our fathers and serve him" is a funny line.

When was this? To turn again to God means that there was a point where that was true. When was that? At what period was America a nation living in faithful worship and service to God?

There's more than one reason why this makes no sense.

1) America has always been a nation of diverse religious beliefs, and even non-religious beliefs.

2) True worship of God, as laid down in the pages of Scripture, involves more than mere lip-service, "These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from Me". So if we were to examine the actions and attitudes of the US, past and present, would we actually discover true worship of God at the national level? The answer, of course, is no. From this nation's inception until the present day, this nation has had a deep, deep problem in merely recognizing the innate worth of other human beings made in God's Image. From America's cruelty toward those of African descent, to our genocidal conquest of the indigenous peoples; from our love of avarice and mammon, all the way to the present where our national spirit is one continually marked by cruelty, war-mongering, hatred of others, and the idolatrous adoration of wealth and power.

Lastly. America isn't Israel. This "turn to the God of our fathers" is invoking the prophetic language of Scripture about Israel returning to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This is a reconceptualization of America as a modern Israel, and treating our American forebearers with the same kind of reverence that Israel had for the biblical patriarchs. It's an attempt at sacralizing America as a nation, and the history of America as an analogue or spiritual successor to the Biblical Israel. Which is not only theologically ridiculous and upsetting, a faithful student of Scripture and someone with a meaningful commitment to the faithful confession of the Christian Church, to Jesus Christ, should never make--it's also just really weird.

No. This isn't some bog standard preaching of the Gospel. This is ethnocentrism being veiled behind a shallow appearance of preaching the Gospel.

The reason why Graham invokes the story of the Amalekites isn't to point out God's patience with us sinners and that by the love with which He loved us He sent His only-begotten Son. The reason isn't to address the substantive evil of America's acts of cruelty and violent savagery built upon racist foundations which insult the Image of God. It's a way of portraying the people Graham doesn't like as modern day Amalekites, and America will suffer unless it rids itself of them.

Why talk about the Amalekites, why talk about Saul's failure to eradicate them, why bring up how God waited for 400 years and then acted? Explain what that has to do with the Gospel. If it was about mentioning God's radical patience with sinners, there are certainly ways to do that--biblical ways. Scripture actually directly addresses God's radical patience in many places--the long-suffering of God who desires human beings turn away from cruel and evil ways. "Do I desire the death of the wicked, says the LORD, do I not instead desire that he repent and live?" "God is not slow in keeping His promises as some understand slowness. Instead He is patient with you, desiring that none perish but all come to repentance and live"

I can't imagine how disappointed and sad Billy Graham is, looking down from heaven, right now.

Click to expand...

Franklin Graham's message was what I've heard his his father preach umpteen times going back 50 years. Therefore it wasn't a message that liberals who want a diluted abridged secularized gospel want to hear.

Servus said:

Perhaps listing to the actual sermon might give better insight.

Franklin Graham's message was what I've heard his his father preach umpteen times going back 50 years. Therefore it wasn't a message that liberals who want a diluted abridged secularized gospel want to hear.

Click to expand...

As a devout Christian what I want to hear is the Gospel preached as pure Gospel. Not a watered down politicized gospel of power and American exceptionalism.

St. Paul says that any other gospel is anathema.

rjs330 said:

No of course not. Why would I? I would say its evidence that our country has fallen far from its Christian roots.

But the person still has a right to their religious expression, whether I like it or not. And I would have a right to my expression as well.

Click to expand...

I don't think an official government account should be violating the First Amendment. The individual office holder is a free citizen and can say and believe what they want. But DHS, as part of the literal government of the United States, doesn't have a religious opinion in any way whatsoever.

The screenshot of Marco Rubio's statement is not problematic. Even though Rubio is a government official he is free to express his beliefs on his personal time and personal social media account.

Government agency accounts are acting on behalf of the agencies themselves.

In case I need to be more specific.

Servus said:

Perhaps listing to the actual sermon might give better insight.

Franklin Graham's message was what I've heard his his father preach umpteen times going back 50 years.

Click to expand...

Is that supposed to be an endorsement?

Servus said:

Therefore it wasn't a message that liberals who want a diluted abridged secularized gospel want to hear.

Click to expand...

No, it was a message that conservatives who want a diluted abridged secularized Gospel wanted to hear.

ViaCrucis said:

As a devout Christian what I want to hear is the Gospel preached as pure Gospel. Not a watered down politicized gospel of power and American exceptionalism.

St. Paul says that any other gospel is anathema.

Click to expand...

Franklin Graham's sermon was absolutely nothing like a watered down politicized gospel of power and American exceptionalism. It was all about salvation through Christ. That's what he and Billy Graham have been preaching for nearly 90 years. You can barely tell them apart.

I see you approved of what a non-christian who most likely also didn't actually listen to it had to incorrectly say about it. That says it all.

Servus said:

Franklin Graham's sermon was absolutely nothing like a watered down politicized gospel of power and American exceptionalism. It was all about salvation through Christ. That's what he and Billy Graham have been preaching for nearly 90 years. You can barely tell them apart.

Click to expand...

If one completely ignores the part I quoted, you might have a point.

ViaCrucis said:

If one completely ignores the part I quoted, you might have a point.

Click to expand...

You mean two lines taken out of context that you built your essay on? I actually listed to him deliver the entire sermon. That's why I know how incorrect you are about it.

ViaCrucis said:

But DHS, as part of the literal government of the United States, doesn't have a religious opinion in any way whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I thought it was Hegseth that said it, nor the government.

ViaCrucis said:

If one completely ignores the part I quoted, you might have a point.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should actually listen to the message before speaking about it. It just n makes your arguments ignorant.

BCP1928 said:

Is that supposed to be an endorsement?

Click to expand...

No, it's a response to the statement of "how disappointed and sad Billy Graham is, looking down from heaven, right now". Which was said because the person who said it thinks Franklin Graham preached something his father never would have, which is completely incorrect.

BCP1928 said:

No, it was a message that conservatives who want a diluted abridged secularized Gospel wanted to hear.

Click to expand...

It's not a message that anyone who wants a diluted abridged secularized Gospel wants to hear.

Servus said:

You mean two lines taken out of context that you built your essay on? I actually listed to him deliver the entire sermon. That's why I know how incorrect you are about it.

Click to expand...

Would you do me a favor and explain the context then?

ViaCrucis said:

Would you do me a favor and explain the context then?

Click to expand...

Why dont you listen to the message yourself and then make your own judgment on it instead of letting everyone else do it for you.

You are letting atheists tell you what a ministers sermon was and was not. As a believer you should listen and let God be your guide instead of atheists.

ViaCrucis said:

Would you do me a favor and explain the context then?

Click to expand...

Graham's message was about how time doesn't expunge sin. It's common for people to believe that if wrongdoing and sin took place a long enough of a time ago, it's been swallowed by time. The point he made about God punishing the Amalekites for what they had done 400 years beforehand, was to show that's not how it works. That the only way for sin to be expunged is through Jesus Christ. Graham is an evangelist. His sermons are given to evangelize the individuals listening in the hope that they will come to Jesus.

As far as comparing America to Israel, throughout its history Israel was mostly unfaithful and turned away from God. So for the most part comparing America to Israel would be the opposite of sacralizing it. But that wasn't where Graham was going with his sermon.