The Passing of Billy Graham and a flaw in parts of the body of Christ

[Ken Rank]

The question is, does his teaching represent God and the Bible. Because his teaching and preaching is still having an influence on the Church today. What We Believe

That is a different subject. One can challenge the "teaching" of another. We explore and reject the Gnostic writings, for example, but the teaching themselves lacks continuity with Scripture. But we don't try and convict the Gnostic teacher from 1800 years ago, he isn't here to defend himself. In fact, his conclusion might have been sincere, just a poor one. Do we ascribe an evil intent to his motive when we cannot speak with him and hear his side of the story? No... nor can we try and convict Billy Graham because he isn't here. But we CAN explore and reject, or accept, his teachings. That's up to you.

 

[joshua 1 9]

nor can we try and convict Billy Graham because he isn't here.

Where do you get this word "convict" from? I personally want to know what everyone everywhere has to say about it. Sometimes if we get everyone's perspective then we have a better understanding. In this case we are talking about a important subject so all the more we should be very balanced in our approach.

 

[Ken Rank]

Where do you get this word "convict" from? I personally want to know what everyone everywhere has to say about it. Sometimes if we get everyone's perspective then we have a better understanding. In this case we are talking about a important subject so all the more we should be very balanced in our approach.

Where do I get it from? I used it in the opening post as the opening post was based off of all the social media posts I saw that were prosecuting and convicting Graham of being a liar, a false teacher, and one who was in bed with Rome. He might be... that was never my point. My point was that it is against Scripture to even level those charges against the MAN when the MAN isn't here to give an account for himself. His teachings? That which he left behind? Pick them apart... accept them, reject them... that is all Scriptural. But bringing charges against the dead, trying them and convicting them? There is no protocol for that.

 

[RDKirk]

If thats so then its no use for the Church to spread Gospel for 2000 years if without knowledge of who Jesus is people can be saved.

A. Because Jesus told us to. There really is no other reason needed than that.

B. However, there is value to being a member of the Body of Christ. The purpose of the Body of Christ is to support the members of the Body. Jesus doesn't need the Church just to evangelize--He proved that in the NT sending out the twelve and the 72. Nor did the Lord need a church in the OT--He just sent out prophets.

But the Lord is more gracious in the Church Age:

“I assure you,” Jesus said, “there is no one who has left house, brothers or sisters, mother or father, children, or fields because of Me and the gospel, who will not receive 100 times more, now at this time—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions—and eternal life in the age to come." -- Mark 10

Where does a grown man get those 100 brothers and sisters, 100 mothers and fathers, 100 children, 100 houses now at this time? That is the Body of Christ. There are privileges to membership, and as the world will prosecute the one who seeks Him, He also provides solace.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Where do I get it from? I used it in the opening post as the opening post was based off of all the social media posts I saw that were prosecuting and convicting Graham of being a liar, a false teacher, and one who was in bed with Rome. He might be... that was never my point. My point was that it is against Scripture to even level those charges against the MAN when the MAN isn't here to give an account for himself. His teachings? That which he left behind? Pick them apart... accept them, reject them... that is all Scriptural. But bringing charges against the dead, trying them and convicting them? There is no protocol for that.

Yes and that is exactly what we should be doing is having a discussion about his teachings because his teachings have permeated the church and are carried to the ends of the world. For example because Paul was the worst of all sinners saved by grace does that mean we are all sinners saved by grace or are we not partakers in the suffering of Christ so that we can also be glorified with Him? I know Christians that have been Christians all of their lives and their suffering is not from personal sin but the effect that the sin of others has on them.

 

[JCFantasy23]

Wow, this is news I missed - I didn't know he had passed on. I wasn't online as much as usual in February