Graham disinvited from Day of Prayer
The U.S. Army has disinvited evangelist Franklin Graham from participating in its special service for the National Day of Prayer. Graham was scheduled to give a speech but the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a watchdog group against religious favoritism in the military, objected to Graham’s speech due to some remarks he made about Islam.
After 9/11, Graham called Islam “evil.” Later on, he wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed that elaborated on his views, saying he wanted to “decry the evil that has been done in the name of Islam,” including mistreatment of women and persecution of non-Christians. Mikey Weinstein, the president of MRFF, said inviting Graham ‘would be like bringing someone in on national prayer day madly denigrating Christianity.’
This week on Fox and Friends, Graham said, “I love Muslim people…. I want Muslims everywhere to know… that Christ can come into their heart and change them…. They don’t have to die in a car bomb… to be accepted by God…. They can be free through faith in Jesus Christ and Christ alone.”
He issued a statement saying he regretted the Army’s decision: “I want to express my strong support for the United States military and all our troops. I will continue to pray that God will give them guidance, wisdom and protection as they serve this great country.”
Sarah Palin followed up with a note defending Graham: “Are we really so hyper-politically correct that we can’t abide a Christian minister who expresses his views on matters of faith? What a shame. Yes, thing have changed.”

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top172 Comments to “Graham disinvited from Day of Prayer”
It is a sad day in our Nation’s Histroy. This is how Christian Freedom and Speech get restricted. All to ensure we do not offend the enemies of God.
It seem it is ok to offend Christian. As long as we do not offend Mulsim, and anti-christian groups like the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
Report comment to moderator
What I’m looking for from Graham is any statement recanting or repenting or admitting he was wrong for calling Islam “evil.” After all, the progressive’s definition of ‘tolerance’ is to embrace other’s people’s ideology as if it were their own. Never mind that that definition doesn’t make a lick of sense.
Report comment to moderator
I get the decision. I think the justification for the decision is fair. Franklin Graham can pray just as well for the military away from the Pentagon as he could if he were present, and it makes total sense for the military to want to avoid the perception that Muslims already have of this war being Christians vs. Muslims.
Report comment to moderator
Here is a great expamle of it is ok to offend Christian. Comment
3
Report comment to moderator
Fine. As long as his replacement has no negative opinions about any other religious group including evangelical Christians.
Report comment to moderator
A sad, sad day.
Now the US Military decides which theological opinions are OK, and which are not. Not a good precedent.
The Muslim extremists are winning. They have cowed the West with their threats and violence, so that any critic of Islam, no matter how polite or tenuous, is shamed into silence. In contrast, it is open season on Christianity. No one is afraid to offend us.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know. I live in a country where people (on this very blog even) routinely insult Jesus Christ, and I put up with it — free speech and all. Now comes “South Park” with a Mohammed Bear or some such thing and the producers, irreverent as they may be, are told they will end up murdered. They are threatened. Seems to me there’s some evil floating around.
It’s time for some to choose if they value free speech or not.
I personally don’t understand why Franklin Graham or any Christian would want to participate in this sham at the Pentagon. I, too, would choose my faith over participation, especially if someone was trying to silence me. I don’t doubt for a moment that Graham is praying for the military, but I do wonder why the military can’t say to the other participants that it believes in free speech — considering they are there to defend the Constitution.
Also, I haven’t heard CAIR denounce the threat to the South Park guys.
Report comment to moderator
And what, pray tell, is the Muslim view of Christianity? Let’s ask the Muslim participant.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, I forgot. They can lie and it’s okay.
Report comment to moderator
This is what is being said. To the Christian in the Military and in the nation. We do not mind offending you. Because we know you are not going to strap bomb to your chest and kill people. We know you are not going to get on planes and crash them into building. So we do not care if we offend you. Oh, by the way, you, Christian, are bigots.
But oh you Muslim, we are afraid to offend you. Because, history shows us, that you will strap bomb to your chest and kill people and history shows us you are have no problem get on planes and crash them into building. So we do not want to get you mad.
Oh, by the way these would NOT have happen if we had a CHRISTIAN in the White House or at lest someone who RESPECTS the Christians.
Report comment to moderator
Welcome to Obama’s America
Report comment to moderator
Sad part is there are people who call themselves Christian that have no problem with this decission.
Report comment to moderator
hackendorf wait until the US Military put restriction of the Christian Chaplains on what part of the Bible, they can preach from. In order not to offend the Gay Solider.
the Military Religious Freedom Foundation try to stop the Christian Chaplains from mention the Name of Jesus our side the Chapel. They also try to stop the Christian Chaplains from Preaching Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. All this is taken place at the Air Force Academy. It has been an on going battle there on these issue with this group.
Report comment to moderator
Sad part is there are people who call themselves Christian that have no problem with this decission.
Like me.
Report comment to moderator
And me.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy has a point. Everyone knows that the Christians won’t fight back. It bothers me a lot that the Pentagon, and therefore the government, is actually promoting a chilling effect on free speech and free exercise. It seems to me that they ARE choosing one religion over another, and it isn’t Christianity.
Report comment to moderator
This is why political correctness is anything but correct. We have been slapping down anybody who says anything that the great committee decides is offensive to “someone”. So CAIR decides that some Muslims in the Pentagon would be offended by Franklin Graham participating in the Day of Prayer. Do what I used to do in a Muslim country and go to the prayer meeting, shut your mouth and pray to Mohammed if you want to. I went to every Friday prayer meeting at the mosque and I went through all the same motions that the Muslims did and while there I prayed fervently that they would come to know the love and the grace and the mercy of Jesus Christ.
In Muslim countries the military participates in Ramadan, El Eit and other Muslim holiday’s and because I was invited to many of these holiday’s because of the work we were doing I participated in everything and when they prayed I prayed to Jesus Christ.
The problem with America is that we try not to offend people and therefore we offend others. If the Muslims in the Pentagon would just realize that you can CHOOSE to participate or not then they can just shut up for all I care.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer where do you thing Christian Persecution is going to start. It they can do it in the Military and show that there is no problem restrict Christian Speech. An the Nation shows that they support it. They will then take it to the next level.
Report comment to moderator
OOOOO, can I be politically correct also and say I’m not offended by these remarks? Give me a break! If you’re a Muslim and the ENTIRE country is having a day of prayer, SHUT UP and pray.
Report comment to moderator
#3 – Jesse D wrote; “Franklin Graham can pray just as well for the military away from the Pentagon as he could if he were present…”
So? This was never in question and it is completely beside the point at hand.
#3 continues: “…it makes total sense for the military to want to avoid the perception that Muslims already have of this war being Christians vs. Muslims.”
A blatantly and willful false perception should not influence our decisions regarding of freedom of speech and faith expression. One thing about speech is that it will ALWAYS be taken and MIS-taken by various listeners in just whatever way they want to perceive it and twist it. But that is no reason to silence free speech.
Report comment to moderator
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is a misnomer. It is the Military Religious Control Foundation.
In today’s America, NEVER trust the label that any group or agency gives to themselves without intense and careful scrutiny of their ACTIONS. Same with candidates.
Report comment to moderator
“The U.S. Army has disinvited evangelist Franklin Graham from participating in
ITS SPECIAL SERVICE
for the National Day of Prayer.”
—————
Does the army consult the Amish, or the NT, for tank placements or Ranger tactics and missions, or hand-to-hand combat maneuvers?
I would think these decisions follow along atheistic, practical lines of reasoning.
Defend and destroy seems to be a typical objective of military orgs.
I guess one could ask, “what’s the army doing there in the first place?”.
Report comment to moderator
Joel when was the last time you heard someone express the idea of support the Christian Faith becuase they did not want to offend the Christian?
Report comment to moderator
Joel #21, perhaps this isn’t so much silencing free speech, but penalizing free speech.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, we saw another fine example of what Muslims might think of Christians at Ft. Hood!
Report comment to moderator
Has Franklin Graham ever actually called Islam “evil”? Or has he only said (quite truthfully) that he decries “the evil that has been done in the name of Islam”? Sheesh–millions of decent Muslims (wherever they are) should be able to say that themselves!!!
_________________
Report comment to moderator
This is not a free speech issue.
Freedom of speech is about the right to speak your mind legally. It says NOTHING about what kind of consequences might result from you speaking your mind.
Franklin Graham is free to say whatever he wants about Islam, but he can’t expect for everyone to approve. If US Army (a secular organization) finds his words too controversial, that’s fine. Franklin Graham IS controversial–he has used his freedom of speech to say things that are offensive to other people. For that reason, he shouldn’t expect to be warmly embraced by a secular body.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy, I am not sure what you are asking at #22, my friend. I would love to respond but just not sure. Blessings to you!
Joel Mark
Report comment to moderator
The Military has given power and control over to groups like tthe Military Religious Freedom Foundation. To decide when a Christian can speak.
Report comment to moderator
When was the last time you heard someone express the idea they did not want to offend the Christian?
We hear it all the time we can not do this because we do not want to offend the Muslims or groups like
the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
Report comment to moderator
Franklin Graham IS controversial–he has used his freedom of speech to say things that are offensive to other people.
—
I find the Military Religious Freedom Foundation saying things that are offensive to Christian, so why do they get to speak the Air Force Academy?
Report comment to moderator
Graceland,
This is a speech control issue and I am displeased with the Army and freely saying so while still NOT suggesting that the military does not have the legal right to control the speech that is heard at their events. I just strongly disagree with their decision, but not with their right to make this horrible decision.
This is also not about Franklin Graham’s right to speak his mind either. Of course he has that. This is about them actively dis-inviting him (which IS a “consequence”) after having invited him and it’s about their given reasons for doing so, which are pathetic.
Franklin Graham was clearly NOT expecting everyone to approve. I don’t know where you got that he was. And Franklin Graham indeed SHOULD personally expect the Army to keep its word to him which they already had given by their own choice knowing that Graham is a Christian who speaks his mind. It is the Army that is intolerant here and that is the point.
Report comment to moderator
So it is ok to silence Christian because someone dislikes what we say?
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy wrote; “Sad part is there are people who call themselves Christian that have no problem with this decision.”
I sympathize with your sentiment and I do have a problem with this decision. However, I respectfully do not regard one’s take on this decision as any sort of test of Christian faith. It saddens me as an American, but as a Christian I can surmise that God’s hand may well be in this in some way that will glorify Him and build his kingdom more authentically. It’s America that this sort of thing hurts, not necessarily God’s eternal kingdom. Maybe I am straining a distinction here, but I hope that helps.
Report comment to moderator
#20 Joel Mark –
Christians in America, in general, have extremely thin skin and a complete sense of entitlement when it comes to matters of the state. If they don’t want FG to speak, it doesn’t have to be a big deal. Not everything is an idication of moral decay or decline, and the reason given for not wanting him to speak makes sense. They didn’t state that they were afraid of offending Muslims, they just didn’t want to give the impression that the military support FG’s viewpoint that Islam is evil. For the military – currently engaged on two fronts with Muslim enemies, and trying hard to win over the “hearts and minds” of many Muslim citizens of those countries, it makes sense that they would want to avoid supporting a high-profile Evangelical leader who has declared publicly his opposition to Islam.
FG is completely right in his assessment of Islam, but when the military is engaged in a war dependent largely on being able to win over Muslims, it’s not an issue of political correctness as much as it is pragmatism.
Report comment to moderator
Joel they have no problem with restrict a Christian speak here. Well what will happen when the military goes the next step in order to not offend gays in the military, they put reestriction on the Chaplain. Will they have a problem with that?
If we do not take a stand aginst the issue when it is starting out, how can we take a stand when it grows?
Report comment to moderator
At what point will Christian stand up an say no you are not going to restrict my speech?
Report comment to moderator
Roy,
NOBODY is restricting speech.
Report comment to moderator
Sure they are. This whole thing is to keep the next Christian in line.
Report comment to moderator
NJ,
Who has had their speech restricted?
Report comment to moderator
Well, on the one hand, I can see the logic of the decision: Christians are not the only ones who pray, so it makes sense to spread the speakers out a little bit – and account for the diverse faiths in the Army. A US Army Day of Prayer speech may not be the most appropriate venue for sharing one’s faith?
On the other hand, although nobody is actually bound & gagged, I recognize the concern expressed that this decision sets a dangerous precedent. Even though they’re not directly forbidding FG from saying anything, they are implying that such speech is unacceptable to the community at large – “taboo” in cultured society, in other words.
Report comment to moderator
Franklin Graham could have been disinvited for mincing words. If you think Islam is evil, you can’t “decry the evil that has been done in the name of Islam.” That just isn’t honest language.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy asked; “At what point will Christian stand up an say no you are not going to restrict my speech?”
Right now and right here. And don’t ever give up, brother. And Franlkin Graham does seem to be taking such a stand himself, and taking the consequences for it (being silenced in this particular venue to which he had been invited). I think the Army blew it big time.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D wrote; “Christians in America, in general, have extremely thin skin and a complete sense of entitlement when it comes to matters of the state.”
Great point! How dare Christians presume to have even similar rights and freedoms for expressing themselves in public as secularists, Buddhists, Muslims, atheists and other citizens have. Who do thhose Christians think they are anyhow, CITIZENS???? Outrageous.
And when criticized, some American Christians are so arrogant as to presume they can defend themselves. Sheesh.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D wrote; “…they just didn’t want to give the impression that the military support FG’s viewpoint that Islam is evil.”
Jesse D, did you miss my post at #26? Please provide conrete proof that Franklin Graham considers Islam itself to be evil and has said so (as opposed to the action of many in the name of Islam). Maybe he has, but I am not presuming this.
Report comment to moderator
Graceland asked; “Who has had their speech restricted?”
Franklin Graham has, in this particular venue to which the Army had invited him and then diinvited him based on the previous and presumed content of his speech.
Report comment to moderator
Ok folks, since FG was removed because he called Islam itself to be evil and this is an offense to the Muslim and other.
An we know for a fact that the name of Jesus as the only way to heaven is an offense to the Muslim and other.
An by letting the chaplains talk about Jeuss in such a fashion could be seen as the Military endorsing such a view.
Some here then must support the idea, that it is ok for the Military in order to not offense to the Muslim and other to bare the use of the name of Jesus by the Military Chaplains.
Report comment to moderator
Graceland 04.23.10 AT 12:39 PM
Roy,
NOBODY is restricting speech.
—
The Christian.
Report comment to moderator
Your definition of free speech, Joel Mark and Victoria, are vastly different from that which the founders intended. By your definition, Franklin Graham, and anyone else, ought to have the right to speak at any event they wish, and to deny them the ability to do this is a violation of their free speech. By that token Deepak Chopra ought to also have the right to speak in any evangelical church he pleases, because for them to deny him the right to do so due to philosophical/theological differences of opinion is a violatino of his right to free speech.
It’s absurd to call this a free speech issue. Franklin Graham has been openly critical about Islam as a religion,/i> (and I fully support him not only in his right to do this, but in his rightness) and this puts him at odds with the army and their philosophy and approach to Islam and its denizens. It’s all right for them to make the decision to disinvite him over their concerns. FG’s rights are intact, and he is exercising those rights by expressing his disagreement with the army’s decision. If the army was preventing Graham from criticizing their decision, this would be a violation of his free speech. No such violation exists.
And Joel Mark, the direct quote from Graham after 9/11 was that “Islam is a very evil and wicked religion.” You can’t get too much more direct than that. And he hasn’t apologized or backed down from that viewpoint (nor should he, if he truly thinks so.).
Report comment to moderator
And we know, oh Christians, that you will not assasinate a man in his own church, or one at his kitchen sink, nor explode a large bomb in front of a government building…nor forced the government to impose your quaint and curious moral rules by government action…
Report comment to moderator
Jesse – a church isn’t a public forum, it has its own doctrine, and beliefs. You have missed the definition of a church.
Report comment to moderator
Whirled Views was pretty good this morning. It’s nice to know we are back to normal. Spraying perfume on a skunk is even less effective than putting lipstick on a pig. Worst of all is having a skunk and a pig getting it on.
Report comment to moderator
By that token Deepak Chopra ought to also have the right to speak in any evangelical church he pleases, because for them to deny him the right to do so due to philosophical/theological differences of opinion is a violatino of his right to free speech.
–
If he is teaching false teaching no. An it is amazing that a Christain would even think in such ways.
Report comment to moderator
I thought the same thing when I read that post – I wonder if ….
Report comment to moderator
55, 56 –
Good grief. I used Deepak Chopra because any evangelical church who allowed him a forum should probably rescind it evangelical badge.
I was drawing a correlation between the Army disinviting Graham and a church turning down Chopra. It’s the same scenario: the military has its philosophy and its approach to foreign relations, and Graham is in opposition to those in this instance, so it’s reasonable for them not to ask him to speak. Any evangelical church who holds to the exclusivity of the gospel doesn’t have much in common with Chopra, so it would be reasonable for them to not invite him to speak.
But – the problem here arises when one says that the military is violating Graham’s free speech by not allowing him to use their forum. If this were true, then the same could be said for an evangelical church not allowing Chopra to speak in their forum.
If that wasn’t clear, then I’m sorry. But I think it was clear if you read carefully and were willing to give me the benefit of a doubt, and ask for clarification rather than assuming the worst.
Report comment to moderator
He didn’t get axed for saying that Jesus Christ is the way to salvation. He got axed for giving voice to the ignorant and intolerant notion that martyrdom by car bomb is a mainstream Muslim idea or is considered the only path to God in Islam. Yes, you cannot say stupid, bigoted, ignorant, juvenile, racist things and expect to be given a mainstream stage to stand on!
Report comment to moderator
But – the problem here arises when one says that the military is violating Graham’s free speech by not allowing him to use their forum
–
What Obama Military is saying, that if you are a Christian an speak the truth. It will be held against you.
Report comment to moderator
He got axed for giving voice to the ignorant and intolerant notion that martyrdom by car bomb is a mainstream Muslim idea or is considered the only path to God in Islam. Yes, you cannot say stupid, bigoted, ignorant, juvenile, racist things and expect to be given a mainstream stage to stand on!
–
so why do the Muslim’s celebrate when they blow them selves up an killing Isreal Children? Why did they celebrate in the Street when 9-11 happen?
Report comment to moderator
Yes, you cannot say stupid, bigoted, ignorant, juvenile, racist things and expect to be given a mainstream stage to stand on!
–
as long as you are talking about Christian, you can.
Report comment to moderator
You’re not addressing what I’m saying. Is it a violation of his free speech or not?
Report comment to moderator
No, it would not be true that Deepak could speak at an evangelical church. The government is not the actor there.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D 04.23.10 AT 3:17 PM
You’re not addressing what I’m saying. Is it a violation of his free speech or not?
–
we have Obama Governement stopping a Christian from speaken and praying because an anti-christian group got mad.
Report comment to moderator
An if you support this decission, get ready this group goal is to remove and stop the name of Jesus from being preached in the Military.
Report comment to moderator
the Military Religious Freedom Foundation are working and cause trouble at the Air Force Academy an is using the same issue we see here.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D,
Your argument by analogy gets right to the point. These poor Christians are so set upon being persecuted that they consciously or subconsciously perform the most remarkable feats of mental gymnastics to invalidate anything that refutes their narrowly held beliefs.
Of course those complaining the most about Graham’s disinvitation have no sympathy for the Imams that teach the evils of Christianity who where never invited in the first place. They simply don’t support the notion of our Government treating all religions equally.
Report comment to moderator
Roy #65 – you’re dodging the question still. Yes or no: violation of Graham’s free speech?
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D 04.23.10 AT 3:48 PM
Roy #65 – you’re dodging the question still. Yes or no: violation of Graham’s free speech?
-
yes, Obama Military did.
Report comment to moderator
Roy, 70 – So would it then be a violation of Chopra’s free speech if my church wouldn’t let him hold a seminar there?
Report comment to moderator
We had a Federal Judge throw out the National Day of Pray an some Christian have no problems with it.
Now we have a group of anti-Christian get FG removed from speaking at the Pentagon during the National Day of Pray, an the same Christian have no problem with it.
Two question
1. What does this tell us about those Christian?
2. What must happen for them to see the danger here?
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D 04.23.10 AT 3:57 PM
Roy, 70 – So would it then be a violation of Chopra’s free speech if my church wouldn’t let him hold a seminar there?
–
No, the reeason one is based on false teaching coming into a church.
The other is based on anti-christian bigots.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse,
Throw in the towel. You’re clearly not getting through…unfortunately.
Report comment to moderator
Graceland, thanks for the advice. One more try -
Roy, this is entirely inconsistent. You say on one hand that Graham’s free speech is violated because an anti-Christian group is getting him removed from a speaking venue. But if a Christian group gets a non-Christian removed from a speaking venue, this isn’t a violation of free speech because it’s “false teaching”? It seems your definition of free speech depends on the quality of what’s being said, which isn’t free speech at all.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D – the problem is you are siding with an anti-christian group that wants to remove the Christian Chaplain from the Military.
They target Christian to remove their rights.
Also FG was invited to speak by the Chaplains, who are the ones to decide the issuie.
An in your fail issue, you person was not invited to speak. If you invite someone that is spreading false teaching to you church. The Chrsitan Church threw God’s Word have a right to show you were you are wrong.
Report comment to moderator
Wow. It’s almost comical.
Report comment to moderator
The real issue is Freedom of Conscience. Franklin Graham is being told that we do not want you around if you offend someone. Personally, I am offended when some bonehead shouts “infidel” in my face and then says I am xenophobic because I believe that their particular philosophy has the potential to incite violence. All that aside, now lets look at some of the things Franklin Graham’s organization “Samaritan’s Purse” has done for Muslims.
Fact: Samaritan’s Purse funded and operated Hospitals in Dar fur providing medical care for Sufi Muslims while the Wahhabi Sunni Muslim government bombed those hospitals.
Samaritan’s purse provided food and shelter to Sufi Muslims while the Wahhabi Sunni Arab horsemen raped and pillaged the villages.
Report comment to moderator
Roy, it’s not an issue of sides, it’s an issue of rights. The military has the right to allow or not allow whoever it wants to use it for a platform. They didn’t want Graham. Churches, likewise, have every right to allow or not allow anyone they want to speak.
Now, you can disagree with their decision to not allow Graham. But to take the step from “I disagree with their decision,” to “They are violating a Christian’s right to free speech,” is quite the long step, and I don’t see that you can rationally get there.
I’m out.
Report comment to moderator
I am amazed that some of you folks who call yourselves Christian are siding and support an anti-Christian group, in it’s effort to silence a FG. How the Church has fallen.
Father, we need reveal in your house.
Report comment to moderator
The military has the right to allow or not allow whoever it wants to use it for a platform. They didn’t want Graham. Churches, likewise, have every right to allow or not allow anyone they want to speak.
–
there you are wrong. they had no problemn with FG until your anti-christian buddies started to caus trouble.
Report comment to moderator
Now, you can disagree with their decision to not allow Graham. But to take the step from “I disagree with their decision,” to “They are violating a Christian’s right to free speech,” is quite the long step, and I don’t see that you can rationally get there.
–
No it is not. It is the right step. The reason the Military Religious Freedom Foundation casused the trouble is because FG is a Christian.
What you and other are not seeing is the Military did not have a problem with FG until the Military Religious Freedom Foundation got involced.
Report comment to moderator
Joe B is does not matter the Military gave into the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. In order to meet their needs.
Report comment to moderator
Let me say this Pastor Roy. It does not surprise me that the Army caved into pressure by the “political pressure” exerted from a Group that has ties to CAIR. I served over 16 years in the US Navy on active duty and 4 years in the Ready Reserve. I saw the same “political” correctness exerted on Navy Chaplains. Evangelical Ministers were pressured by the commanding officer of the ship and the Chief of Chaplains to refrain from presenting the Gospel. I knew many wonderful pastors who left the Chaplaincy because they had to compromise their faith in God.
Report comment to moderator
Evangelical Ministers were pressured by the commanding officer of the ship and the Chief of Chaplains to refrain from presenting the Gospel. I knew many wonderful pastors who left the Chaplaincy because they had to compromise their faith in God.
–
Joe B. I am getting the impression that some here would support the military, when they pressure Evangelical Ministers from preaching the gospel. I believe once they remove the gay ban, that is going to happen.
Just like with FG, to keep the peace, they will give in to anti-christian groups.
Report comment to moderator
Joe B. I was in the Amry for 8 years. An saw the same behavior.
Report comment to moderator
#58 – Mynock, you misrepresent Franklin Graham’s words and position rather blatantly.
Mynock wrote; “…you cannot say stupid, bigoted, ignorant, juvenile, racist things and expect to be given a mainstream stage to stand on!”
This has zero to do with Franklin Graham or the point of this thread.
Besides that, I disagree. In today’s politically correct public discourse, you have to say stupid, bigoted, ignorant, juvenile, racist things (against anyone on the right or any thing Christian) in order to be given a mainstream stage to stand on!
Report comment to moderator
#51 – Jesse D wrote; “Your definition of free speech, Joel Mark and Victoria, are vastly different from that which the founders intended. By your definition, Franklin Graham, and anyone else, ought to have the right to speak at any event they wish, and to deny them the ability to do this is a violation of their free speech.”
Clearly, Jesse D, you did not read a word I wrote. Please read my comments before responding to me. You misrepresent my comments profoundly.
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark – 88 –
YOU WROTE:… “You misrepresent my comments profoundly.”
It’s a constant with this individual – he can’t debate without twisitng.
Report comment to moderator
Joel – did you go over to the Arizona illegal alien thread? The governor signed the bill – YEAH!!!!!!!
Report comment to moderator
There is some hyperbole in my post at #87, but the point stands.
Jesse D, as taxpaying citizens, we fund the military but taxpayers do not fund evangelical churches. We should have more of a say in public events sponsored by the Army than in events sponsored by churches.
But again, I have not advocated that the Army is trying to restrict Graham’s speech outside of the venue to which they invited him, then disinvited him. I am disagreeing with their decision (which is my right) which was based on their expectations regarding the content of his speech.
Report comment to moderator
Joel, Victoria – what people are missing the Military had no problems with FG speaking until the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, decide they had the right to cause trouble.
What many here do not want to understand is the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, went after him because he is a Christan.
That is why this is about FG and Christian freedom of speech.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
I have not seen that thread, and I did look.
JM
Report comment to moderator
“Of course those complaining the most about Graham’s disinvitation have no sympathy for the Imams that teach the evils of Christianity who where never invited in the first place. They simply don’t support the notion of our Government treating all religions equally.”
Evidently there is no need to invite those Imams in the first place. The mere notion that something someone once said might be found offensive to them is all the ground needed to rescind an invitation to that person to speak on some other topic entirely.
Although Islam’s teaching that Jesus was not the Son of God is defined in 1 John 4:2 as the spirit of the antichrist, no Christian groups are suing the Pentagon to prevent Muslims from serving as chaplains, let alone forestalling a one time invitation to participate in a special service. Honoring shariah law through fear is the opposite of equal treatment.
Report comment to moderator
Joel – 93
It’s the “Reactions to the Arizona immigration bill” thread –
The GOV. signed the bill.
Report comment to moderator
I have a question, If the U.S. Military invited somebody to speak at their meeting and then found that he was rabidly anti-Christian anddenounced all vilence done in the name of Christianity; would it be a violation of his free speech if they decided that he should be “disinvited”?
I don’t know anything about Mr. Graham’s comments but I really don’t see that he was stopped from speaking his opinions.
Some of the anger here may stem from the fact that he is Billy Graham’s son. Or from frustration at the President.
Report comment to moderator
To clarify, I don’t see that his speech was restricted; only that he wasn’t allowed to speak at a certain event. The Military did not stop Mr. Graham from speaking his mind in another place that didn’t belong to them.
I think they have the right to decide who can speak at THEIR meeting, and even to change their mind about it.
Report comment to moderator
esther 4.14
A few things
1. The Military had no problem with FG speaking. These program as set in advance.
2. This became an issue when the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, got involved. This group as been cause the Military all kinds of trouble.
3. The Military had to decide do we let FG speak or do we give in to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
The gave in to this group.
I believe this is also a sign of lack of leadership from the Commander and Chief. Which has not made a comment about this.
Report comment to moderator
I think they have the right to decide who can speak at THEIR meeting, and even to change their mind about it.
–
esther 4.14 if they are given into an anti-christian group, what does that tell us?
Report comment to moderator
Esther,
You do see how the Army was pressured into revoking their invitation and going back on their commitment? Do you see that I am disagreeing with that decision to cave? So the problem is not that the military is stopping FG from speaking his mind as an American in other venues and I don’t know who you think is objecting on that basis anyhow.
Report comment to moderator
Esther, I don’t know how old you are, or where you were or what news you listened to after 9-11 — I do KNOW that Franklin Grahams remarks about Islam were broadcast everywhere, I don’t know anyone who is deeply involved in Christian work or the church, or politics WHO DID NOT KNOW ABOUT Graham’s remarks – they were heard around the world.
Franklin Graham’s statement regarding Islam had nothing to do with his being Billy Graham’s son. I have met Franklin, he is one strong Christian man, he speaks his mind, knows the Word of God and does not mince words when it comes to the truth.
His remark had nothing to do with “frustration” with the president -
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark, I also disagree with the military’s desicion. It seems to me that Pastor Roy is saying that Mr. Graham’s free speech rights were violated. I think the military was wrong to be a pushover but if they decided removing a speaker was better then a lawsuit I don’t think that means they’re evil or anti-Christian.
Pastor Roy, Please explain why this indicates bias. YOU don’t think Mr. Graham is “too hot to handle”: you also agree with him. Someone who doesn’t agree with him might feel he is being bigoted. The President could not make statement and win. I think he is very wise to be quite and he might be wise to stay that way.
Report comment to moderator
Esther,
Do you have a Qur’an, have you ever read what it says?
Report comment to moderator
101, I heard Franklin Graham’s remarks but I didn’t pay too much attention. I was probably wrong in that and I am going to look them up now.
I was saying that the frustration at him being “disinvited” might have stemed from those sources. I think Islam has shown a strong propensity toward violance; if that is ALL he said, I agree with him. Clear enough?
Report comment to moderator
I know Islam is often violent and that the Koran incites violence, you don’t have to convince me of that.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
I have searched and I can find no thread titled, “Reactions to the Arizona immigration bill” anywhere.
What am I missing?
Report comment to moderator
Just looked up Franklin Graham’s comments; they seem pretty reasonable to me. That wasn’t the point, though, my point was that this is not a free speech issue. The Military didn’t violate anyone’s rights.
Report comment to moderator
Joel, it was posted by Angela on the 21st.
Report comment to moderator
#16 in left-hand column if your screen formats like mine.
Report comment to moderator
Joel,
Here is the link to the thread:
http://online.worldmag.com/2010/04/21/reactions-to-the-arizona-immigration-bill/#comments
Report comment to moderator
Franklin Graham was not disinvited because he is a Christian. His freedom of speech was not compromised, shut down or trampled on. He was disinvited because he spoke freely and it upset our Muslim “friends.” It is not up to the Army to mediate a theological war of words as much as I wish it had found reasons to make a stand. And that may not be over yet.
However, the Army has done us a favor and many there know it. This is terrible PR for Islam and has given Franklin Graham an opportuntiy to reaffirm the truth and not recant. I’m glad this happened and look forward to other opportunities to restate the Good News through the mainstream news media and highlight the intolerance of the religion of peace and its tacit invertebrate supporters.
Confrontations arise without our looking for them. Remember, there’s more than one way to take advantage of a crisis! There will not be a naked public square for along time as we speak up in more ways than one.
Report comment to moderator
Got it. Thanks V.
Louise, your points are well taken.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks Joel. I deleted several weasel words before I hit “post” in case I’d be misunderstood, so I much appreciate your feedback.
Report comment to moderator
There are many religions in the world, including the “Big Five,” Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Each of these religions has many divisions. Not one has a universally recognized leader in today’s world. Not one has a united point of view. Each religion at various times and places has been involved in violent and horrible behavior, each religion at various times and places has done much good and contributed to the benefit of humans.
The United States, at the cost of great suffering and conflict, has become a pluralistic society. White Protestants (which I am pretty sure comprise the majority of people at wmb) have a feeling of entitlement. We founded this country and established its ideals is so deeply ingrained in you that you are not even conscious of it. Of course, you established this country by stealing it from the original inhabitants and built half of it on the backs of black slaves dragged from Africa. My Indian neighbor flies an American flag in front of his house. He and his wife are devout members of a church.
His children serve in the military and the police. I have worked and lived with black people. Many of them served and died in our military. Neither of these groups became “Americans,” that easily. I have worked with quite a few American Muslims from all over the world without difficulty or conflict.
Certainly white Protestants are a large part of America’s past heritage and present life, but you are no more “America” than all the people of other traditions and backgrounds. We are engaged in a war with many factions of Islam, but we are not engaged in a “war with Islam” and “Islam” is not engaged in a war with the “Christian world.”
This sad thread represents worldmagblog at its worst. I have asked, and seen no answer, how are people of varying and conflicting “world views” not subject to empirical analysis and held with great emotion and passion, going to live together in this crowded world? I don’t see a clue in this discussion, nor the slightest awareness that the problem exists.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy, Please explain why this indicates bias. YOU don’t think Mr. Graham is “too hot to handle”: you also agree with him. Someone who doesn’t agree with him might feel he is being bigoted. The President could not make statement and win. I think he is very wise to be quite and he might be wise to stay that way.
–esther 4.14 the group that is causing the trouble want to remove all Christian Chaplian from the Military. They target Christian speaking at Military Functions. So Yes FG Speech is being target because he is a Christian.
The Military refused to stand against this group is the result of a poor command and cheif.
Report comment to moderator
but if they decided removing a speaker was better then a lawsuit I don’t think that means they’re evil or anti-Christian.
-
the group is anti-christian and evil not the Military.
But I am seeing pattern it is ok to remove Christian from speaking in the name of peace and love. It is ok to offend Christian. An other Christian have no problems with,.
Report comment to moderator
Another verse from Mathew and a thought for you all:
“And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.”
Back in the day when I was devout, I was never one for the public displays — like National Prayer Day or insisting on public prayer in school because things done in public are done for show much more often than not.
When an individual of any faith agrees to lead an ecumenical service for the military or any other governmental institution, their prayer is necessarily watered down to the basics — that is the point of an ecumenical service as it touches the base where religions share philosophical elements.
Graceland — I appreciated your posts on this decision and speech.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria the sad part is people here are ok with FG being removed.
Report comment to moderator
Comment deleted by request.
Report comment to moderator
Comment deleted by request.
Report comment to moderator
Romans 13:1-7 (New King James Version)
Romans 13
Submit to Government
1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor
Report comment to moderator
sorry folks I posted these in on the wrong page please forgive me.
Report comment to moderator
Folks, I am tried of seeing Christian being targerted, by anti-christian group.
the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is an anti-christian group, that targets Christian in the Military or Christian that work with the Military. An it is a sad to see people who Christian support them here on this issue. The Military did not have a problem with FG speaking UNTIL THIS GROUP CAUSED THE PROBLEM.
This group is who are working hard to take Freedom of Speech from Christian in the Military or working with the Military.
Report comment to moderator
I applaud the MRFF for standing up for the rights of minority religions. It is no more appropriate to have a fundamentalist Christian preacher who preaches the evils of Islam, than it is to have a fundamentalist Muslim preacher who preaches the evils of Christianity, speak at an Army National Day of Prayer service. You would be right to be mad if the army invited a radical Christian hating Muslim to the Day of Prayer, and you shouldn’t expect other religions not to share your indignation when the shoe is on the other foot.
As soon as the government gets involved with prayer and religion these kinds of divisions and arguments are inevitable.The Christian majority, lead by the activist fundamentalist Christians , do not, and will not, hesitate to use the apparatus of government to spread their religious ideas and morals. Shirley Dobson, the head of the National Day of Prayer Task Force, has turned the National day of prayer into a almost exclusively fundamentalist Christian event. Because of the abuse of the religious majority, the National Day of Prayer is being used to assault the very religious freedoms that make America great. The National Day of Prayer is a bad Idea, and should be abolished.
Report comment to moderator
kwatson you are not a Christian are you?
Report comment to moderator
Why is it ok to offend Christian?
Report comment to moderator
The devil knows the Biblical revelation is the ONLY God-given text. IT is THE final authority of the Person, Life, and work of Jesus Christ.
Thus, expect the spiritual counterfeiters to RAGE and attack.
“And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.” (Re 11:18)
Time to board the glory train!
“Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;” (Heb 1:2)
Report comment to moderator
I must say I have developed quite a respect for Jesse D. Keep up the good work, as your points were concise and to the point.
#125 Kwatson
I simply wish to point out that Franklin Graham is not a fundamentalist, and NDOP is not exclusively Fundamentalist, as it is held by pretty much every Christian group I know. Also Shirley Dobson is not a Fundamentalist either. Also I am not aware of this Christian majority you speak of, as active Christians do not make up a majority of this nation. Also, the majority of active Christians are not Fundamentalist, leading me to believe you do not understand what a Christian Fundamentalist is. This is not an accusation, you might simply have the same problem that most non-Christians have in determining the differences between Christian Fundamentalism, Evangelicalism, Pentecostalism, etc.
Report comment to moderator
Kwatson, if you want me to, I can explain the history of Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism later, as I have stuff to do.
Report comment to moderator
Rom, you should do that. I mean it.
Report comment to moderator
Agreed Louise. The next time I see Kwatson actively posting and I have the time, I shall. Unless you wish me to do it for everyone, which I then shall do it the next time I have time.
Report comment to moderator
It’s your call, Rom, and His.
Report comment to moderator
Jesse D/79
“…it’s not an issue of sides, it’s an issue of rights. The military has the right to allow or not allow whoever it wants to use it for a platform. They didn’t want Graham. Churches, likewise, have every right to allow or not allow anyone they want to speak.”
I think the difference is this: the First Ammendment does not restrict the actions of churches or other private, non-governmental groups. There is no first ammmendment right, for example, for anyone to say anything they want from the pulpit of my church. I, as Pastor, control what is said from the pulpit, I carefully screen guest preachers, as I have a responsibility to do.
However, the First Ammendment does indeed restrict government action. Its very purpose is to say that the government should not play favorites when it comes to religion or speech. This is why A church can restrict what is in its newsletter, but the Congress can’t tell World Magazine what to print. The Pentagon, as a government agency, does not have the same latitude in censoring speech as a private organization does. This is not to say that the Pentagon must accept all speakers, but there is a higher level of legal scrutiny involved in a situation like this. It is all because the Pentagon is a governmental institution, and the First Ammendment is designed to regulate governmental behavior.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy,
Thanks for bringing the Military Religious Freedom Foundation to our attention. I agree their that their hostility toward Christianity is a wake up call.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
I once heard that a “fundamentalist” is someone who takes Scripture more seriously than they take themselves.
But seriously, there is also a historic meaning of “fundamentalist” in the American Christian world. Indeed, the history of Billy Graham and his rejection by many Fundamentalists (like Bob Jones, for example), have led to the common way of distinguishing between Fundamentalists and Evangelicals.
But, I don’t really care whether Franklin Graham is a Fundy or not. (I’ll leave that determination to our resident Church Historians) I do believe he is a great man of God, and I am sorry the military caved. I do agree with Louise, though, that this can be used for good, to the extent that the publicity generated might provide an opportunity for folks who wouldn’t do so otherwise to examine FG’s ministry and be confronted by the claims of the Gospel. FG’s graciousness in all this speaks volumes.
Report comment to moderator
Hackendorf – I appreciate many of your posts, but I do find fault in referring to “fundamentalists” as “Fundy” it’s not respectful.
Bob Jones was called a “fundamentalist” but that does not kill the definition for everyone else. Let us be careful not to ‘bag’ people when there are a number of things which fit into the definition of “fundamentalist” – Bob Jones also repented of his racial ideas, which had nothing to do with “fundamentalism”
Report comment to moderator
I have read many of you calling Franklin Graham “FG” this is the first time I have ever observed this sort of identification for someone who deserves more respect. Think of all the people who you admire, and then decide if you refer to them in this way. It comes off as ‘flip’ – that doesn’t fit what I thought, regarding some of the posters on this blog.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
I haven’t seen Franklin Graham referred to as FG before, but I’m accustomed to seeing references to JFK, LBJ, and GW, and I’m pretty sure it’s not indicating any lack of respect. It’s a short way to refer to the person where the last name may not be clear enough – because there are other famous people with the last names Kennedy, Johnson, and Washington. And Graham.
Report comment to moderator
For me, FG standing for Franklin Graham is simply an economy of characters to type. In this casual medium, I think we also use GW, LBJ, JFK, HST, FDR, TR, and many other initials for well-respected people. I mean no disrespect to Franklin Graham by using FG as a kind of short-hand and I doubt that others feel differently.
Report comment to moderator
You can do as you wish, I can’t stop anyone – Franklin Graham is an Evangelist, which in my opionion deserves more respect.
Why not call Martin Luther ML, or John Calvin JC – or Dr. James Kennedy JK – I think you get the idea……….
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
I apologize, I meant no disrespect by either the title “Fundy” or using Franklin Graham’s initials. If I conveyed any such disrespect, I repent.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
Actually, I wasn’t thinking about Bob Jone’s racial views when I made my post– I was only setting a backdrop for why, historically, many people do not assume that all Christians who embrace the innerant authority of Scripture are “Fundamentalists”. It had alot to do with Bob Jones Sr.’s repudiation of Billy Graham. Many folks, including Billy Graham, stopped using the label “Fundamentalist” to describe themselves, and instead starting using the term “Evangelical”. Much of the difference, as I understand it (again, I defer to others here)was in what degree believers could cooperate with non-Fundamentalists. Billy Graham, for example, invited all the pastors of an area to join him on the platform during his crusades, even if they were modernists. Bob Jones objected strongly to this process. He also objected to the newly formed NEA (National Association of Evangelicals). decying, among other things, their abandonment of the word “Fundamentalist.” Bob Jones Sr. actually once said that “An Evangelical is someone who says to a Modernist, ‘I’ll call you a Christian if you call me a scholar.’” Regardless of what one may say about that, it does display a sharp wit
I personally support the unity of all Bible believing Christians to the greatest degree possible– I’m not tyring to take sides here, only report the history of the terms to the best of my ability.
Report comment to moderator
Obama is meeting with Billy and Franklin Graham today at Billy’s home in Montreat, NC. No US President has ever visited Graham in his home, a log cabin designed by his wife Ruth.
There is obviously a political motive here. I would love to hear what the Graham’s say to the media messiah, but I am sure it will all be kept silent.
Report comment to moderator
On the one hand we have the US government declaring that Franklin Graham is evil for calling our enemies evil. On the other hand, we have the head of the US government making all nicey nice with said evil person who is the symbol of evangelicalism in America.
Maybe it’s nothing. Maybe the Muslim sympathizer and friend of terrorists who celebrates every Muslim holiday and teaches the nation Arabic from the White House and who tried to eliminate the White House nativity creche just wanted a burger in a log cabin with spicy mustard.
Or maybe the self appointed messiah and healer of the planet wants to gain some legitimacy by being seen with actual representatives of Christ.
Report comment to moderator
Hackendorf,
Thank you for your explanation and the way you expressed yourself, it means a lot.
I have meet both Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham – Both men are very humble. I’m not crazy about labels because they don’t always represent exactly the individuals beliefs. When I met Billy Graham I was humbled by the way he treated me, his eyes were a mirror of GOD’s love for everyone, I will never forget the time we spent talking. Meeting his son Franklin was another experience, the man looks you straight in the eyes, it’s as if there isn’t anyone else in the room, his respectful demeanor, love for others is un-deniable. He’s truly interested in one’s life.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
I can only imagine that it was indeed an awesome experience to meet these men. I have visited the Graham homestead and museum in Charlotte, and although I have never personally met either Billy or Franklin Graham, certainly what you observed of them is consistent with the spirit of their ministry as it was presented at Charlotte.
The labels we use can indeed by slippery things, often imprecise and open to misinterpretation. Because I led a congregation out of a liberal denomination, I was often called a fundamentalist. At first I would argue, saying that I was more precisely an Evangelical, but after a while, I decided there were worse labels that could be affixed to me, and so I stopped arguing. In the end, I would rather be thought of as a fundamentalist than a modernist, if those are the only two options available.
Report comment to moderator
#148 Graham homestead in Charlotte? He lives in Montreat, NC near Ashville. My daughter goes to school there.
Report comment to moderator
My daughter said that Obama’s helicopters and secret service shut down the town of Montreat today so no one could go to church.
Report comment to moderator
Editor’s Picks
MacArthur New Testament Commentary, 25 Volumes
$599.99$399.99
You Save $200 (33%)
NKJV Study Bible- Large Print Edition, Black Bonded Leather
$79.99$52.99
You Save $27 (34%)
Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible
$29.99$19.99
You Save $10 (33%)
See more books at the Bible Gateway store2 Timothy 4:1-5 (New King James Version)
2 Timothy 4
Preach the Word
1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at[a] His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
I believe this passage need to be look at in regards to the issue facing Christian today
Report comment to moderator
149/XION
The Graham “homestead” in the sense of his birthplace and boyhood home, which has been restored along with an interesting museum and bookshop which talk about the history of Billy Graham’s life and ministry.
Report comment to moderator
#152 Oh, I see. OK. Thanks.
Report comment to moderator
#151 Pastor Roy. I am really enjoying my new ESV study bible which was recommended here at WMB!
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy,
I use an NKJV Study Bible, but wasn’t aware of a large type version, which…well, let’s say I might be increasingly interested in such an edition…
Report comment to moderator
I am sorry still getting a handle of this new computer key boards I am cutting and pasting things and taken to much. Please forgive me
Report comment to moderator
2 Timothy 4
Preach the Word
1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at[a] His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
I believe this passage need to be look at in regards the issue facing Christian today.
Report comment to moderator
FG meet with Obama, this is from the locally newspaper here in Colorado Springs.
“Franklin Graham said he and Obama spoke briefly about the Pentagon spat, with the younger Graham saying that activists with an agenda were trying to pull all religion out of the military.
“I wanted to make him aware of that,” Franklin Graham said. “He said he would look into it.”
Report comment to moderator
I think it should be noted that it wasn’t the Army per se who rejected Mr. Graham. It was the few Obama political sycophants, both military and civilian, at the top of the command chain who did so.
Obama’s Muslim sympathies are a matter of public record and this incident merely adds to the list.
Report comment to moderator
THIS is a short video, it reveals what Franklin Graham believes regarding Islam (Muslim) – it answers many questions.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks for sharing the video, Victoria, and praise God for Franklin Graham and his gracious honesty and faithfulness.
Report comment to moderator
12 Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. 13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Mark 13:12-13 (KJV)
Even now, believers in Jesus Christ are losing their lives as this scripture continues to be fulfilled. Fear of death is a powerful persuader but this life is but a speck of time compared to eternity. Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Christians are not commanded to kill nonbelievers. God has a place prepared for nonbelievers unless they repent of their sins and believe in Jesus Christ. Our Christian God does not use sinful sex to lure believers to kill nonbelievers. His Truth and Love can save them if they could only believe.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria (#160),
Thanks for the good video.
Report comment to moderator
Christians should avoid the Pentagon like they avoid a brothel, an abortion clinic, or a strip club.
–
spoken like a true false Christian
Report comment to moderator
Frank (#164):
Your implicit support for the insulting, self-righteous and indeed, downright stupid remarks of Mr. Vance should be troubling to your own conscience as both a Christian and an American.
Furthermore, our Middle East policies are NOT an either/or question between soldiers or missionaries. That kind of thinking is as simplistic and naive as your whole isolationist mindset. It is necessary to employ both soldiers and missionaries. Done properly (and for the most part it is), their work is complementary, not contradictory.
Report comment to moderator
MIKEY WEINSTEIN, JESUS-BASHER
What kind of wine has Mikey Weinstein been drinking?
As an anti-Christian Jewish supremacist and as the president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, he’s doing all he can to create an anti-Jewish backlash and help bring about the predicted endtime Holocaust of Jews that’ll be worse than Hitler’s.
Neither Falwell, Hagee nor any other Christian initiated this prediction. But Weinstein’s ancient Hebrew prophets did.
In the 13th and 14th chapters of his Old Testament book, Zechariah predicted that after Israel’s rebirth ALL nations will eventually be against Israel and that TWO-THIRDS of all Jews will be killed!
Malachi revealed the reasons: “Judah hath dealt treacherously” and “the Lord will cut off the man that doeth this.”
Haven’t evangelicals generally been the best friends of Israel and persons perceived to be Jewish? Then please explain the hate-filled back-stabbing by David Letterman (and Sandra Bernhard, Kathy Griffin, Bill Maher etc.) against followers of Jesus such as Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann.
Weinstein wouldn’t dare assert that citizens on government property don’t have freedom of speech or press freedom or freedom to assemble or to petition the government.
But God-hater Weinstein maliciously wants to eliminate from government property the “free exercise” of religion – especially by evangelicals – a freedom found in the same First Amendment. Significantly, this freedom was purposely listed FIRST by America’s founders!
And Weinstein wouldn’t try to foist “separation of church and state” on strongly-Jewish Israel, but he does try to foist this non-Constitution-mentioned phrase on strongly-Christian America.
In light of Weinstein’s Jewish protectionism and violently anti-Christian obsession, Christians in these endtimes should be reminded of Jesus’ warning in Mark 13:9 (see also Luke 21:12) that “in the synagogues ye shall be beaten.”
Maybe it’s time for some modern Paul Reveres to saddle up and shout “The Yiddish are Coming!”
Report comment to moderator
Laurence Vance: Christians should avoid the Pentagon like they avoid a brothel, an abortion clinic, or a strip club.
Pastor Roy: spoken like a true false Christian
Frank: Care to elaborate on that?
You may certainly disagree w/Dr. Vance. But what about his remarks is indicative of “false” Christianity?
Is there something in Scripture or the historic creeds of the Church that requires American Christians to agree with everything the Pentagon does, and not to call it to account for its evil deeds?
Report comment to moderator
Michael Martin: It is necessary to employ both soldiers and missionaries. Done properly (and for the most part it is), their work is complementary, not contradictory.
Frank: Interesting.
America at one time was allied with the tyrant Saddam Hussien. Indeed, Ronald Reagan once referred to him as a force for good (or liberty, or somesuch) in the Middle East.
He definitely had his problems, but at least under his regime, it was legal to be a Christian and practice your faith.
Now Iraq is officially an Islamic state (thank you, GWB, BHO and Pentagon!), and many Christian sects and communities there have fled/are fleeing Islamic persecution.
So tell me Michael … how is that whole “employing both soldiers and missionaries” thing supposed to work again?
Report comment to moderator
I may have sharted this with you already, Michael, but just in case I haven’t:
You should read a bunch of Karen Kwiatkowski (Lt. Col., USAF-Ret.) to learn what she witnessed first-hand re. the Pentagon’s complicity in stove-piping intelligence (trumping up the supporting intel while ignoring the contrary intel) to justify the invasion of Iraq:
Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski’s anonymous Pentagon essays, as published by Col. David Hackworth, 2002-2003
Report comment to moderator
Frank (#170):
Your link didn’t work. It merely jumped me to entry #160 on this thread.
Report comment to moderator
Frank (#169):
The thrust of your comments is that Hussein was not so bad, that Iraq was not an Islamic state under his rule, and that Christians were free to practice their religion while he was in power.
Points #1 and #2 are absurd and you cannot, for even a moment, make a credible case for them, unless you want to join ranks with the likes of “Baghdad Bob” as a spokesperson for reality.
As for #3, I grant you that the situation for Iraq’s Christian minorities during the Hussein period was more tolerable than it is today. However, that was not because Hussein was a “good guy.” It was because it merely suited his purpose to temporarily refrain from attacking them. He had no love for Christians or religious freedom. Now that he is gone and the various Islamic sects are vying for power, they and their sponsors (Iran, al-Qaeda, the Saudi’s, Syria) attack each other and everyone else in the process, including innocent women and children.
Even though the current government of Iraq is Islamic, they have not instituted any policy of Christian persecution. Christian persecution is at the hands of lawless Jihadists who also kill their fellow Muslims by the score.
Meanwhile our troops, having toppled a ruthless dictator, work hard to bring order out of Muslim chaos. They protect and serve, building roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, helping the economy of Iraq to move forward, and giving the common people some say in their government again—things that our liberal press deliberately plays down for their own political reasons.
So our troops serve in the process of building some degree of political and economic freedom while at the same time our missionaries seek to bring some degree of spiritual freedom to a land currently dominated by the hellish religion of Islam. In this way our troops and our missionaries work in concert with one another, perhaps not in a deliberately premeditated way, but in some ways similar to the way that the Pax Romana helped in the early spread of Christianity.
Of course, the jury is still out on that, and maybe it will all come to nothing. I don’t know, only God knows. Perhaps the isolationists like yourself, Muslim sympathizers like Hussein Obama, the Marxists in the Democrat Party, and the Jihadists will all prevail and allow Iraq to descend once again into total Islamic despotism—a despotism that will inevitably be turned, once again, into a base for attacks against the United States homeland, Israel, and other western nations.
On the other hand, if we are successful, God willing, it will certainly not be because of isolationists like yourself. You have been no help at all. Any future success will be in spite of you, not because of you. You should think about that.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!