Franklin Graham spanks clergy who ripped Trump for holding Bible
Bishop Mariann Budde of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington was among the ministers who lashed out.
"He didn't come church to pray, he didn't come to church to offer condolences to those who are grieving," she said. "He didn't come to commit to healing our nation, all the things that we would expect and long for from the highest leader of the land."
Graham, CEO of Samaritan's Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, called the reaction "unbelievable" in a Facebook post Wednesday morning....
Would that be the same Bible that former President Bill Clinton used when he walked out of the White House with Je$$e Jackson after he was caught with Monica Lewinsky, despite saying I did not have... with that woman? Another liberal clergyman was also involved with his 'recovery'
McKay Coppins wrote: The presidentâs photo op outside St. Johnâs Church was emblematic of his appeal to the religious right....
.... Andrew Whitehead, a sociologist at Clemson University, has argued that Trumpâs religious base can best be understood through the lens of Christian nationalism....Whitehead told me in an interview that Christian nationalism is often not really about theology (and thus canât be ascribed to all conservative churchgoers [ that sure is the truthâđđ ] ): âItâs about identity, enforcing hierarchy, and order.â That Trumpâs religious posturing has little to do with religion has long been a matter of conventional wisdom (see: Corinthians, Two); fewer have grasped the extent to which thatâs true of Trumpâs âreligiousâ base as well.....
excerpt from,"The Christians Who Loved Trumpâs Stunt"
Neil wrote: In a sane world I would concur, but these days, I'm reluctant to attempt any rational political inferences. There used to be state insane asylums; now, I'm convinced America *is* an insane asylum. Could it be mass demon-possession? My conclusion is inspired by James Petigru, Atty. Gen'l of S. Carolina, who famously said after its secession, "S. Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum."
You could be right, Neil. In fact my wife and I were within the last hour questioning whether there is actual demonic influence, because what is going on seems insane by any measure.
Mike wrote: Democrats doing nothing about the burning down of black-owned businesses could cost them the election.
In a sane world I would concur, but these days, I'm reluctant to attempt any rational political inferences. There used to be state insane asylums; now, I'm convinced America *is* an insane asylum. Could it be mass demon-possession?
My conclusion is inspired by James Petigru, Atty. Gen'l of S. Carolina, who famously said after its secession, "S. Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum."
I just finished reading the comments that were posted here by all of you, and let me say this. I very thoroughly enjoyed the thoughts, the wisdom, and the courtesy extended by everyone. I was just thinking that I can only imagine how lively a "Round Table" discussion it could be just on these thoughts that were posted, a discussion with each one of you being at the table all at the same time. I really really enjoyed all of you. I would also just love to be able to sit in on this interesting and very lively discussion.
JD Saved by Grace wrote: Frank wrote: Well letâs see. We have a media political pastor who is criticizing an evangelical feminist for her comments regarding an immoral buffoon president. Am I missing something? Very well-stated. Thank you. ITA
Well letâs see. We have a media political pastor who is criticizing an evangelical feminist for her comments regarding an immoral buffoon president. Am I missing something?
Jim, do you suppose Bidenâs history of sexual battery âcould cost him?â NahâDemocrats only care about that sort of thing when a Republican is accused.
https://tinyurl.com/ybzs42o9 (Donald Trump's Bible photo opportunity during the George Floyd protests could cost him), Timothy, a good article for you to read do I say is it perfect--no. Since it's from ABC. AU, which can have a liberal slant on things; you might not be happy with it?
Oh, but you will like this is printed on Breitbart I'm going to have to wash out my tablet for using this source.
âIâm fairly confident that Mr. Trump will be defeated in the election. The next morning, a lot of Republicans will say, âTrump? I donât recognize the name.â Theyâll get over this fairly fast. Our parties are very durable. Our two parties have formulated the political competition in this country since the Republicans first ran a presidential ticket in 1856.â ---George F. Will
hey_yo wrote: How dare you speak the truth so boldly! You must bow and scrape before these principalities and powers and rulers of the darkn... -ahem- rulers of our faith and godly government! Speak more lovingly or you'll get censored, deplartformed, de-Christianized and dehumanized.
Thanks for your comment. Getting censored or even being hated for speaking the truth is an honor.
Matthew 10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. 23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. 24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
Now of course that would never mean that someone should desire to be hated. And it certainly doesnât mean that simply because someone is hated, that makes them right.
Actually, Jim, since the rioting began, almost twenty million Democrats have switched party affiliations, with 85 percent of them becoming Republicans. You say, âIs that true?â No, but nothing you ever post is true, either, so why should that be considered a valid criterion? One old geezer disagreeing with something the president saidâwhich, by the way, was true, the governors who refuse to end the mob violence ARE jerksâhardly constitutes a split in the GOP. Chomp another Cheeto and dig a little deeper, Jim. Maybe the Democratic dogcatcher in Bumfuzzle, Idaho said something derogatory about the prez that you can supply a link to.
Matthew Teague wrote: The staunchest of evangelicals, 90-year-old televangelist Pat Robertson, split from Trump on Tuesday.
He told his television viewers of the president: âHe said, âIâm ready to send in military troops if the nationâs governors donât act to quell the violence that has rocked American cities.â A matter of fact, he spoke of them as being jerks. You just donât do that, Mr President. It isnât cool!â
excerpt from,"Trumpâs Bible photo op splits white evangelical loyalists into two camps"
Thank you for your kindness as well and welcome to the forum. I really like your quote.
âthe more you learn the more you realize all there is to learn and what you don't know.â
That is one of the more humbling statements that can only be said by one who is open to learning. Itâs a rare trait these days. May God bless you as you serve Him.
James Thomas wrote: The edition consisted of ten thousand copies in which, *****as was the custom in small King James version Bibles*****, the books of the Apocrypha were omitted...
Thank you for that, isn't it amazing that the more you learn the more you realize all there is to learn and what you don't know.
What I meant by quoting Psalm 14:1 was that we know our founding father's were not fools but we also know all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. it is a little more difficult in a time when many were rather fluent about fundamental Christian teaching, yet they were for granting a freedom to continue in the myriads of differences, contrary to Scripture. It would seem that would make it more difficult to define membership in the visible church, Yes? A member of the invisible church is known only to God and the man himself who, as Paul instructs; is to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." Php 2:12,13
I believe our founding fathers were fluent in Christian fundamentals but I understood most of them to be deists. Yet they were men in trying times and men are more sober then.
Frank wrote: Well letâs see. We have a media political pastor who is criticizing an evangelical feminist for her comments regarding an immoral buffoon president. Am I missing something?
How dare you speak the truth so boldly! You must bow and scrape before these principalities and powers and rulers of the darkn... -ahem- rulers of our faith and godly government! Speak more lovingly or you'll get censored, deplartformed, de-Christianized and dehumanized.
FYI wrote: Sorry for the confusion. So what you are saying is that he reprinted the KJV. I was trying to beat the heat of the day with outside work.
No problem, Yes I did check out your link and I agree. There is a lot of information to sift through. Although its not directly stated regarding the version being a KJV it was inferred here in a small passage from the link you gave.
"The first English Bible printed in this country, as well as the first Bible to be recommended to the people by the Congress of the United States, was relatively small in dimensions. It measured but five and five-eighths inches by three and one-eighth inches. Printed in brevier type on American-made paper, it contained 726 leaves (1,452 pages). It is considered to be an excellent piece of printing with remarkably few divided words and with pages unmarred by "rivers" of blank space. The edition consisted of ten thousand copies in which, *****as was the custom in small King James version Bibles*****, the books of the Apocrypha were omitted. The graceful title page carried the coat of arms of Pennsylvania and the New Testament showed Robert Aitken's initials, R.A., in script letters below the Order of Books on the back of the title page."
COMMENTS 
locked 
System Notice
that sure is the truthâđđ ] ): âItâs about identity, enforcing hierarchy, and order.â
I'm going to have to wash out my tablet for using this source. 
