Learn to Discern: Franklin Graham’s Tweet on the Outcome of the Presidential Election

Franklin Graham, Twitter, Spiritual Abuse


 

I would like to discuss this tweet without making it political. I find it spiritually abusive, but not because it has to do with Trump winning. Look within the message. What can you find here that is spiritually abusive?

 

143 comments on “Learn to Discern: Franklin Graham’s Tweet on the Outcome of the Presidential Election

  1. Moderator note: Gov Pappy posted his tweet here, and it’s because of his tweet that I did this post. But I removed his tweet because I want us all to think about the tweet carefully and see how it can be used in a spiritually abusive way.

    I will repost Gov. Pappy’s tweets later 🙂 ~ja

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I believe the implication from Mr. Graham is that Trump’s election victory was a sign of God’s favor. After all, he (Franklin Graham) heavily invested in Trump’s election with his Republican campaign tour of all 50 state capitals cleverly disguised as prayer meetings. His credibility as the heir to his father’s legacy rests on God placing Donald Trump as president in direct response to the prayers of the christian Right. I, on the other hand, think Mr. Graham does not realize that when God places people in positions of power within governments with such abysmal character as Trump, it’s in judgement of His people turning to the world’s system(s) in idolatry rather than humbly relying on and serving Jehovah.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. God does not interfere; silly people interfere. Yes, the tweet is utterly (spiritually) abusive, because it ever so slightly alludes to everything, not just politics. One has to read between the lines, and Julie Anne is a master at that.

    Triple sigh, is this year ever going to end? I need strong eggnog.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I believe the Kremlin was directly involved in the outcome of this election. I believe people made the choice to hack. People made the choice at Wiki Leaks to dump the info into the public sphere. People in the US either chose or did not choose to cast their vote for a particular candidate. Eighty-one percent of Evangelicals chose to vote for a human completely lacking in morality, integrity and character to be the leader of the “free” world. There were other choices on the ballot in most states. Mr. Graham is playing the “it’s all God’s fault game.” And that is a semi truck load of horse manure.

    Like

  5. I’m willing to bet, had Hillary Clinton won, either Franklin Graham’s response, or that of pastors Robert Jeffress or John Hagee (and other like-minded), would’ve been something like this:

    “Oh no, Hillary’s win is a judgement of God against the United States!
    We are not supporting Israel enough!
    America passed homosexual marriage, so we are being judged! America is getting the leaders she deserves!”

    Then, we’d all have to spend the next four or eight years of Hillary’s time in office watching various preachers on TBN’s “Praise the Lord” show and Pat Roberton’s “700 Club” show praying fervently, with their eyes tightly shut….
    Desperately imploring the LORD to send America revival because it’s obvious (OBVIOUS!!!) America has turned away from God, because the wicked Hillary was permitted by God to lead the U.S.A. into destruction to teach our wicked rear ends a lesson.

    Then you’d hear a billion of these types of Christians, like Pat Roberson, uttering this line from the Bible in their prayers:

    “If a nation that is called by my name will turn to me and turn from its wicked ways, I will turn to them, and heal their land…”

    Before you get angry at me (if you’re a conservative):
    I say all the above as someone who is right wing, who is pro- Israel, who didn’t like Hillary OR Trump, is pretty socially conservative…

    But also as someone who is tired of other right wing Christians using every single event in culture to bolster their agenda.

    (They also do this with natural disasters: every time a city gets knocked out by floods, tornadoes, or hurricanes, the John Pipers, John Hagees, Pat Robertsons, et al, crawl out from under their rocks to say, blog, and Tweet that said calamity was the HAND OF GOD to judge a nation that is pro-homosexual marriage or not pro-Israel enough.)

    I’ve been seeing this junk repeated since I’ve been a kid.

    (And yes, the left wingers have their version of this too, and they also annoy me with this stuff.) 🙂

    Liked by 6 people

  6. Daisy, do you want some of my eggnog? BTW, I agree with you altogether; preachers are just as opportunistic as politicians. They should rather concentrate on spreading the gospel and telling the truth and leave the wordly, sensational limelight to the emtpy heads of this planet.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Boston Lady, yes, I will take some of your egg nog if you do not mind. Thank you!
    In all seriousness, I’ve been thinking of picking some up at the store. 🙂

    I just know if Hillary had won there is a pretty good chance we would’ve seen many of the preachers and celebrity Christians going on and on about how horrible it is on their shows. I’ve seen enough of John Piper’s tweets and watched enough TBN over the years to be able to predict how these guys react to stuff like this.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. This may not rise to the level of spiritual abuse but it is bad logic. It is a false binary choice, a true binary choice would be A or not-A as opposed to A and B (which is the type of choice Graham presents – such A and B choices might both be true or both be false). Beyond that the word interfered is perhaps not the best word choice for the action of God (as Boston Lady pointed out).

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Why does it have to be one or the other? Could it be God working His will through Russia’s interference? Or God giving us what we asked for, as when Israel asked for a king, by blinding us to the significance of Russia’s interference? Because yes, we had some pretty good clues what was going on before the election.

    For that matter, it could just be that our time is up and it’s time for someone else to take the lead for the next century or two. Belief in American exceptionalism is such that we seem to think we’re exempt from the rules, but kingdoms rise and fall all the time. Push comes to shove there’s no reason to believe the American empire will be any different. Just as the British Empire began to collapse after WWII, with the sun finally setting on the empire when Hong Kong was returned to China in 1997, maybe, just maybe, the American empire that burst on the world scene during WWI has run it’s course.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. He is not spiritually abusing me because he has no power over my life or thinking. positioning it as “spiritual” abuse, I think is the problem. To me, it’s no different than a Muslim saying “Allah willed it” which they do all the time with events. Same thing.

    If Christians thought about that they might stop invoking God all the time.

    But both have free speech to tweet such silliness.

    Like

  11. Boston Lady and L. Lee: I don’t think Franklin was asking if God interfered in the election. It’s hard to be absolutely clear when restricted to 140 characters, but I get the sense that the question that was intended was: Did the Russians interfere with the election, or was it the working of God’s will? I don’t think “interfered” was meant to carry over to God.

    Besides, God obviously gave Franklin what he wanted. So that would hardly qualify as interference, right? /sarcasm

    Liked by 1 person

  12. “I believe the Kremlin was directly involved in the outcome of this election. I believe people made the choice to hack. People made the choice at Wiki Leaks to dump the info into the public sphere. People in the US either chose or did not choose to cast their vote for a particular candidate. Eighty-one percent of Evangelicals chose to vote for a human completely lacking in morality, integrity and character to be the leader of the “free” world. There were other choices on the ballot in most states. Mr. Graham is playing the “it’s all God’s fault game.” And that is a semi truck load of horse manure.”

    Hmm. I thought this sort of comment wasn’t allowed?

    Like

  13. My opinion is that Franklin just looks for ways to put his 2 cents in on everything to keep himself in the limelight with his fan base/donors. He could have used the same tweet if Hillary had won. He would just need a substitute for Russia, like the media intervening running those awful off air clips of Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. This is an egregious violation of the commandment not to take God’s name in vain. How does Franklin Graham know Trump is God’s approved candidate? The commandment not to take the Lord’s name in vain isn’t an injunction against silly verbal ticks like “OMG.” It is against dragging God’s name to peddle’s one’s agenda. That whole “don’t say things like OMG and take the Lord’s name in vain” is a pure American Evangelical invention with no basis on Scripture.

    For those of us old enough to have endured the apocalyptic hysteria of the 70’s, and 80’s and read best sellers like “The Late, Great Planet Earth” by Hal Lindsey, Russia was supposed to be the mortal enemy of Israel and God (War of Gog and Magog). Has biblical prophecy changed now that the leaders of the Religious Right find themselves enamored with Russia and Putin?

    Liked by 3 people

  15. Daisy, you hit the nail right on the head.
    This stuff is so subjective.
    The guy is redefining reality for his readers. However things go, he co-opts it for the message he wants to give.
    It reminds me of this ad I keep seeing for Huckabee’s dvd about “God’s role in American history” that disgusts me. Who is able to speak for God and say what he is doing and why? No one! It’s blasphemous.

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Think Frank Graham is bad?

    Check this out from John MacArthur. He is off go a good start. He rightly says God is sovereign and the kingdom of God will march on regardless of the outcome of the election.

    Then it goes downhill really fast. He goes on to argue that there is only one choice for Christians at the ballot box this year and that you cannot possibly claim Christ and vote Democrat. In a 15 minute talk, he manages to commit every single logical fallacy from this list. It’s quite a feat.

    My thoughts on Tuesday's election: https://t.co/HXwitv9QQX— John MacArthur (@johnmacarthur) November 7, 2016

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The best one is toward the end. He cites high suicide rates among transgender teenagers and places the blame squarely on liberal Democrats for gender confusion.

    Like

  17. Echoing L. Lee, it’s a false dichotomy. God could have used the Russians’ interference with the election to bring about his will. Yet, we don’t know what God’s will is – is Trump judgment or reprieve? Remember it was God’s will to raise up the Assyrians to destroy Israel and lead them into captivity.

    I don’t think it’s wise to put words in God’s mouth. Just because Graham wants Trump and Graham thinks he is God’s mouthpiece doesn’t mean that Graham should be tweeting that. Maybe he should stick with God’s REVEALED will rather than his secret will.

    I don’t feel “abused” by his post, since Franklin Graham holds no place of spiritual authority over me, but I do feel that he is trying to cross a line he shouldn’t cross. Instead of stating his opinion as his opinion, he is trying to shove his opinion into God’s mouth. It sounds like pearls of wisdom from someone like Piper – ala “I’d rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy”

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Mr. Opportunity wants you to believe that if you don’t think God had a hand in the election, then you really are not a “true” Christian. Think hard people….do you want to thank the Russians or thank God?

    Liked by 1 person

  19. I wish these big name pastor/teachers stop using twitter period. One can’t do theology in one line zingers. Franklin Graham is giving legitimacy to what really is just rumors and speculations on the media’s part, which is Russia was tinkering with the election. There has been no proof of that any where. He put God in the same boat as the Russians, that God is tinkering around illegally with the election. I’m not sure if that was his point but that is what basically he said.

    Liked by 3 people

  20. My opinion is that Franklin just looks for ways to put his 2 cents in on everything to keep himself in the limelight with his fan base/donors. He could have used the same tweet if Hillary had won. He would just need a substitute for Russia, like the media intervening running those awful off air clips of Trump.

    Agree with Sister. They all want to stay relevant so they can write books. Guess Franklin will say that anyone that dares to question Trump questions God. Good luck with that one. Trump will be the most watched, and critiqued, president ever. I don’t mind that btw. Hope this starts a trend for ALL presidents. Extend that mindset to ALL politicians and I will be a happy camper.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. I’m afraid I think the reference to the Russians is a hangover from the cold war and the need for an enemy. The Soviet Union has gone.

    I suppose the more Calvinist you are and therefore emphasise the sovereignty of God, the more likely you are to see Trump’s election as being God’s direct will. If you tend in the Arminian direction, you will believe that God’s sovereignty includes within in it allowing men to make their own decisions. The institution (existence) of government is part of God’s sovereignty, but any one holder of high office (‘kings and all who are in high positions’) may, when subject to election as today’s rulers are in the West, be left to the choice of the electorate.

    It is no good blaming God if and when the electorate make a poor choice!

    I have every sympathy for American evangelicals and other flavours of Christians who, particularly in the election just held, had to try to balance doing their civic duty in seeking the welfare of their country and keeping a clear conscience at the same time.

    One thing worthy of consideration is whether Mike Pence as an evangelical Christian just might be a kind of Joseph to Trump’s Pharaoh. I do wonder if this might be the hand of God in the election. Only time will tell, and since I am not a prophet nor son of a prophet there is no way of knowing God’s involvement in the election apart from thinkingly applying general principles embodied in scripture.

    Like

  22. I would suggest that Mr. Graham’s tweet is an ill-advised pairing of God’s sovereignty with political chicanery.

    Spiritual abuse is not immediately apparent that I’m willing to listen.

    Like

  23. It’s not so much abusive as it is bad theology. Why is Trump president? Because God, the Russians, and the American people all want him there. If Clinton would have won, it would have been because God and the American people wanted her there.

    Note to Franklin Graham: The fact that God wants someone as president (or whatever) doesn’t mean God approves of their policies.

    Like

  24. kay, “My opinion is that Franklin looks for ways to put his two cents in on everything to keep himself in the limelight with his fan base/donors.”

    You may be on to something there kay! What would happen if these so called men and women who speak for a god on a regular basis, would just shrivel up like a weed in the garden after its root has been snipped by the hoe? I find it totally fascinating how the far the visible church has come in spiraling downward to placing their hope, faith and trust in this man or that woman who claims they know the LORD better than anyone else. Let alone, speaks for god/ or a god of their own understanding. Without the media, Franklin and the religious right or left, may have to actually earn mammon the old fashioned way, and I’m not speaking of prostitution or pimping here, although I have read/studied our Holy Scriptures where it does make reference to the harlot church.

    Growing up in a democratic home and living in an area that primarily voted the Dem. ticket, I was led to believe that our faith in Jesus Christ favored the Democrats. Another words, I believed Jesus was a Democrat with the light shining upon that big city on the hill that consisted only of Democrats. After college and marrying into a Republican family, and attending a conservative Baptist church for many a year, I was led down the road of Republicanism, listening to conservative preachers, preaching the false gospel of politics/patriotism/nationalism from the pulpit system. I concluded with my higher educational thought process that,

    Jesus, was indeed, no doubt, a Republican. As I grew in my faith by reading the Scriptures and listening to my conservative pastor, I just knew that this jesus figure, had to be a reformed republican savior, who was working out our salvation to give us our best life now here on this earth. Go, go, jesus! Then, I had the pleasure of a self proclaimed “prophetess”, speak the words of god over me during one of the churches “mystical moments.” Needless to say, her self proclaimed prophecy did not come true, thus making her a false prophetess.

    Franklin’s words above remind me of the rank heresies permeating many a denominational system, where men and women speak vain words/prophecies from their hearts, and yet cannot even begin to know God’s truth for we are NOT the LORD.

    I have come to learn that the Jesus I believe in, Jesus, the Christ, of our Holy Scriptures was neither a Democrat, nor a Republican. He did not identify with the political parties of His day, nor did He ever promote earthly people and governments to be our One and Only King, and yet, we are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

    With ever flavor of political ice cream the Christian enjoys, whether it be Democrat or Republican, that individual has a tendency to equate a jesus of their own making with such tasty fervor. And yet, Jesus came not to create His Kingdom of God here on earth, but His Kingdom yet to come which is in heaven. Utopia will never happen in this fallen world.

    Psalm 118: 8-9 speak truth to the matter of political conundrum,
    “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.” (or princesses-a human thought added for reassurance)

    Liked by 2 people

  25. Replacement theology:

    “Replacing the Word of God, our Holy Scriptures, with the self prophecies, the self anointed words, the self adoring everything of man (or woman.)

    Another point of reference: I have heard many a preacher man speak for a god, in proclaiming natural disasters as a judgement from the Almighty for the sins of a particular geographic area. And yet, when the storms/tornadoes/natural disasters happen to these very same charlatans’ homes/cities/geographical area, what particular sins are happening to them that they should be struck with such calamity? Is God pouring out His Judgement over their homes/families because of their own sins?

    Perhaps we all fall short of the Glory of God in many areas.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. Not spiritually abusive at all.
    God “interfered” in the election by using the Russians to elect Trump, just like God used the Babylonians.
    So if Trump’s children are killed in front of him just before he is blinded and led away in chains it will all be part of the plan?

    Like

  27. Why does it seem in “the gospel world” that everything in life is black or white? I suspect that teaching “obedience” as the ultimate Godly trait reduces every life event as caused by either “A” (good) or “B” (bad). No critical thinking is allowed. No grey areas, no flexibility. It boils down to which “spiritual leader” you believe holds the real spiritual truth. What a great opportunity for narcissists, manipulators and sociopaths!
    I agree with Lydia00-we have the power to choose who we follow. Unfortunately, many children are so indoctrinated with the idea of total obedience, as adults they do not realize they do have that power to choose what to believe. Certain church cultures rely on conformity and insist on leaders holding all the power. Making certain “Christians” into rock stars just reenforces this power grab and are not called out on their outrageous (Piper, Graham) ideas.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Julie Anne,,

    If Hillary won, I wouldn’t consider Franklin Graham’s tweet Spiritually Abusive,, so why would one think it would be abusive because Trump has won, is beyond my imagination.

    Both candidates were flawed,,. I can’t say one candidate was more or less moral than the other. It came down to economics.

    To a woman that has the economic means of escaping abuse, then poverty is not an issue as maybe her biggest challenge is hardwood or tile in the kitchen remodel. But many to many women, poverty is no friend to the abused as it enables them.. Clinton backed extreme Gov’t over-regulation, which is a job killer enabling women.

    My wife and I prayed to God the morning of the election, that we would except the results regardless of the outcome.

    One would have to do some serious bottom feeding and fabricate a fantasy inside their brain to suggest Graham’s political views and tweet as Spiritually Abusive, unless you are fixated into thinking any view contrary to your own as Spiritually Abusive, which I would suggest seeing a counselor with neutral political views.

    I am no fan of Franklin Graham,, I liked his father’s preaching

    This thread is better off avoiding politics if one feels Spiritually Abuse by following the tweet of someone with differing political views.

    Like

  29. Rob war, it isn’t media speculation that Russians meddled in the election, it is the opinion of the CIA and now the FBI as well. Presumably they have evidence; I hope they can share whatever evidence they can with the American people without giving away secrets about how they got it to the Russians. I think that it what Grahan was responding to, not media speculation.

    Like

  30. Julie Anne,,

    I’m not seeing Spiritual Abuse by his tweet,, I don’t follow Franklin Graham so maybe you see things about him that I don’t.

    Frankly, I wonder if you would’ve felt Spiritually Abused by his tweet, if Hillary won the election.

    Like

  31. Julie Anne,

    Oh, the abuse (spiritual, whatever, choose your flavor) in Graham’s tweet is there, but it’s even clearer when one reads between the lines and sees the bigger picture. It doesn’t start or end at “politics,” His implication (ever so slyly, as these folks are trained so well to do), does NOT end there; it invades your home, your life, your viewpoint on everything, your complete view of what they call Christianity (their way).

    Besides, you know…being personal spokesmen for God and all that jazz, how dare you, Julie Anne, or any other person who do not have a hotline and some free minutes to heaven, even consider doubting him/them. I’m shivering of fear…not. I’m shaking in my boots. NOT.
    This guy is dangerous, spiritually (in my opinion). Avoid him and his ilk. Bad tree, bad fruit, diarrhea.

    Like

  32. I just don’t understand how people can think they’re following the Lord whilst heaping these absolutely ridiculous charlatans at the same time.

    Biggest donkeys ever haha

    Guess that’s deception for you haha

    It would be funny if it didn’t cause real harm to real people.

    These guys only get a platform because people reject the Lord.

    Nothing has changed.

    Why walk in the Spirit when you can follow Franklin and his merry band of Billy wannabes.

    There is nothing uglier than “family ministries”.

    Nothing to do with God.

    Money grubbing filth pots.

    I hate it.

    God is good end rant

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Salty,

    Somehow, you make my day every time you post. Thank you for that, and thank you for the truth (which is more important, I guess).
    You are the Salty of the earth, dear sister.

    Like

  34. Irene. Friend!

    Don’t forget gossip.

    It’s not calling out the lying, cheating, sheep milking charlatans!

    It’s gossip!!

    And the Lord hates gossip.

    More than child abuse.

    More than adultery.

    More than domestic abuse.

    More than idolatry.

    Yep.

    Let’s stop talking altogether and allow the men of Gawd who love the title of “Pastor” reserved only for the Lord of Lords and King of Kings. (Jesus)

    Let’s not pick on them.

    Let’s not question them or discuss them lest we commit the unforgivable sin! Haha

    Irene.

    WHO IS the dissenting party?

    The abuser or the intended victim?

    God judge me on that day.

    We need a big F dissention party in Christendom.

    If you have more issue with the letter F and the deep emotion it is suppose to convey…

    Then you could be a part of the problem.

    (If you get my point) 😏

    Like

  35. “Not spiritual abuse at all, just a logc error. Sometimes i wonder whether the point of this blog is dissension.”

    I would add, as a Libertarian, it has become obviously imbalanced. As in some victims are PC and some aren’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. Julie Anne and lydia00,,

    If Franklin Graham backed Hillary and Hillary won the election and he wrote the same tweet, I don’t see how his tweet would be as Spiritually Abusive to the author of this thread,, so why is it now?

    Could the author of this thread, writing about this particular tweet, is a little more Politically motivated in this instance, because Hillary lost?

    I don’t think politics has a place in this thread,, we don’t need to know the political views of one another,, because we have a tendency to ignore the serious flaws of one candidate over the other.

    We are exposing our political and spiritual ignorance when we attempt to connect the two together, like many clergy are doing, maybe even Graham.

    This thread has been good resource for many of us to realize how clergy, leaders, Patriarchs and Matriarchs has used, manipulated and hid behind their hyper-doctrines in a way that devastates their victims.

    Like

  37. Salty, Franklin Graham hasn’t been accused of any of those things. Julie Anne has accused him of profiting off the election–without providing any proof. He has personally been a first responder in Haiti and many other places. Also, this is a forum for people to run others down generally. Read Daisy’s accusations against Pat Robertson. It is hard to make a case that the Lord hasn’t used and blessed him.
    I agree with Mark that politics has no place here. It is a not a subject worth dividing christians over.

    Like

  38. Thank-you Mark. I have heard pastors/profits/profitesses from both political parties, Democrat as well as Republican, actually speak for god/a god. But then, within the visible church, I have been told to follow Beth Moore as well, for she too, is a literal mouthpiece for god/a god, amongst other false teachers and preachers that I’m supposed to follow on a daily basis to get my spiritual nourishment for the day. So much for my Bible and the mind that our LORD gave me. According to the mouthpieces for god/a god, that’s not enough!

    To date, I haven’t heard a libertarian or a green party candidate speak for god, much to their credit. And to be honest here, I have to admit that at one time I actually followed Pat Robertson’s theology and gave mammon to the Christian Coalition.

    Oh, what a fool was I. May I reiterate the word “was.” My spiritual eyes weren’t opened until we purchased a computer and I began to listen to his broadcasts. I couldn’t believe my ears at the garbage coming out of that man’s mouth….including his false prophecies for profits. I had to go and splash cold water on my face to make sure I was hearing straight.

    And on that day, our LORD humbled me for I had been a fool in following this man’s smooth speaking newsletters that I received in the mail. I now call it “viper mail!” And as I gathered with the other women from my former church for Bible study (another lie – we didn’t crack open our Bibles to study the Word of God….we gossiped, gossiped, and gossiped some more), I too, was able to brag and boast like the other women, of how much mammon I gave to the “Christian Coalition.” We were a proud, proud lot.

    Boy, was I ever gullible; and just plain stupid. Now I guard my heart fully knowing the source of my ‘springs of life’….Jesus, the Christ. No longer follow religious folks who ‘speak for god’ for He has freely given us His Word, and the Holy Spirit who lives inside of His people, to illuminate His Scriptures to us.

    Like

  39. Katy,,,

    You are welcome,,, your comments solidity’s my point, this thread should avoid politics.

    This election was the strangest most of us have witnessed,, from two strong willed candidates who could’ve been arguably (by some) the most flawed two choices.

    If Graham’s Trump leaning Tweet was Spiritually Abusive, then so is every clergy’s Clinton leaning Tweets.

    Like I have suggested and hasn’t been disputed, If Graham favored Clinton and Clinton won the election, I don’t think the author of this thread would’ve felt Spiritual Abused with Graham’s Tweet.

    Like

  40. Then I will dispute it. I have been following this site for years now and I have no idea about Julie Anne’s politics. I am a Hillary supporter and I know lots of clergy and not one of them ever told me that God wanted her to be President. Not one. They would have considered it spiritually abusive to speak for God and I would have too.

    I have however been told repeatedly by numerous fellow evangelical Christians from the time Ronald Reagan first ran for President that the Republican candidate was the only Christian choice. During this last election I was told that I was possessed by a demon, had a Jezebel spirit, and was going to hell. I was warned that I would have to stand before God and account for my vote.

    Like

  41. Marsha,,

    I’m sorry that you accused of being possessed, those that said those mean things make me question if they lack love and maybe aren’t even a Christian,

    But don’t kid yourself to think that liberal clergy didn’t stay silent about who they think should’ve been president.

    That is the thing I don’t like about clergy exposing their political views, is they think because they are clergy that they have better political insight about who they think is the right candidate and are confident in their position they can proclaim it, whether they are Dem or a Pub.

    As for the author of this thread, her political views it is very evident to me. But outside of politics, her thread has been a valuable resource of understanding what real Spiritual Abuse is,, and where much of it is coming from.

    Like

  42. Mark, there is a difference between a minister or Christian talking about who they vote for and why in a conversation and he or she claiming that they know that God wants a particular candidate to be elected.

    My political choices are determined by my Christian values but I would never say that I know God’s will or even that God determines the final outcome of an election. I am Arminian.

    Like

  43. Marsha,,

    It takes all kinds,, some use the pulpit to influence,, as the authority whether they lean Dem or Pub,, others conceal it. But Graham in my view wasn’t force feeding his will, which is what most abusers do.

    If we don’t like what Graham has to say, we can tune him out, which is what I’m doing.

    Clergy have a tendency to interpret scriptures that matches their politics,, or they can emphasize a view and ignore the countering view,, which is influencing (which is something we all do) and they all don;t agree,, and we know the Holy Spirit isn’t the spirit of confusion, which is why bringing up politics is a bad idea. in a tweet or a thread like this.

    I lean somewhat Arminian as well,, accept some Arminians believe you can lose your Salvation after you have been saved. I believe you can’t be unborn after being born-again.

    Like

  44. @Katy, love your description of Replacement Theology. RT is usually a pejorative term used by dispensationalists directed at adherents of Covenant Theology, but I like yours better.

    We might as well rewrite Galatians 5:22-23

    But the fruit of the Spirit is capitalism, American Exceptionalism, patriotism, war-mongering, homophobia, Islamophobia, jingoism, misogyny, and Donald Trump.

    Like

  45. David Cho,,

    You wrote:

    “We might as well rewrite Galatians 5:22-23

    But the fruit of the Spirit is capitalism, American Exceptionalism, patriotism, war-mongering, homophobia, Islamophobia, jingoism, misogyny, and Donald Trump.”

    Seeings how you are being just opinionated as the rest of us,, I’ll add my opinion and suggest, that your newly formed verse is an over the top and ridiculous statement that is insulting to any of us who voted for Trump.

    “Misogyny” give me a break.

    Mexico is Patriotic, Canada is Patriotic,, Patriotism is not as bad word.

    Like

  46. Mark, you have my vote on Cho’s post. There’s an agenda, and it’s rather exposed and extravagant. Almost like, “Huh? What?”
    (What is the topic of this specific thread again?)

    Like

  47. Boston Lady,,,

    It is embarrassing, I think Cho exposed his interpretation and meaning of Graham’s tweet.

    Too much was read into that tweet. Like I suggested, if Graham was a supporter of Hillary, and wrote the same tweet, I don’t think those that supported Hillary would’ve felt Spiritually Abused by that tweet.

    This thread is acting no different in exposing their views, like Graham or Rev Wright in being self proclaimed Christians and exposing their political take on the elections.

    Though we won’t discuss Wright,, will we?

    Like

  48. Mark,

    You are trying to draw an equivalence which in this case does not work. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly voted for Trump. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly favor conservatism. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly identify with the right wing of the political spectrum.

    Who is the left equivalent of Franklin Graham? Of James Dobson? Of Tony Perkins? Of Focus On the Family? Of the Christian Coalition?

    Name one prominent religious leader from the left, and I will match ti with 5 from the right. Ready?

    Jeremiah Wright? He has been thrown under the bus by the President soon after the infamous tapes came out. We haven’t heard from him in almost 8 years. Do Democrats genuflect before him for support? The equivalence you are trying to establish as if some leftwing preacher who had 15 minutes of fame cancels out the likes of Franklin Graham simply does not work.

    Like

  49. David Cho,,

    Who cares what preachers politically think,,, you know most conservatives will not vote for a liberal. And a liberal will vote liberal most of the time.

    Obama didn’t through Wright under a bridge, he simply distanced himself to avoid bad press.

    Your analogies are in bad taste.

    If Graham supported Clinton,, and wrote that tweet, it would not have had the same effect to Clinton supporters, who profess to be Christian.

    Many of us voted for Trump,, view your hyperbole using words like misogyny or insinuating words like capitalism and patriotism as a fault, is insulting.

    Those of us who have experienced real Spiritual Abuse who voted for Trump don’t come into a site like this those of us who have been spiritually abused and voted for Trump.

    The rhetoric that is coming out of Obama’s mouth is creating more tension with Russia and Israel is non-sense,, so you can eat your war-mongering words.

    Russia didn’t sway the voters mind in the rust belt, it was Hillary’s lack of ability to reach out to them.. Any hacks that effected Hillary came from Wiki Leaks not Russia.

    This thread should avoid politics.. I will also suggest when you re-write the bible and change the words,, it may have greater consequences than you think.

    Like

  50. Mark, are there Hillary supporters in this thread that I am not aware of? You keep saying “if Graham supported Hillary.” That would never happen. When/if that ever happens, I will deal with it. You keep trying to draw an equivalence that just does not happen. It is as likely as I winning a lotto, so I don’t spend a lot of time planning what to do with a $50 million winning.

    My hyperbole, if you will, was a criticism directed at conflating political conservatism with Christianity. People think being Christian automatically means being a political rightwing conservative. It is a perception which conservative Evangelical Christians have cultivated for decades.

    It is not uncommon for a Christian, when around other Christians, say things like, “we won” in reference to the election. Who is “we”? The assumption is, Christian = rightwing. But presumptuous statements full of assumptions, suppositions and conclusions simply roll off Evangelical Christians’ mouths. No Christian that I know ever would say that if Hillary would have won.

    The equivalence you keep trying to remains hypothetical and unlikely. At least not in my circles. But keep drumming up imaginary scenarios as if they surmount to legitimate arguments.

    Sure, Obama simply distanced himself from Wright. Do Democrats line up around the block to secure Wright’s endorsement? Is there a liberal Christian equivalent of Liberty University which has become a mandatory stop for Republican candidates seeking Evangelical support?

    Like

  51. Mark, since you are still trying to come up with equivalences, perhaps you can point out to tweets from prominent leftwing Christians from 2008 and 2012 crediting God for Obama’s wins. You keep saying, “if Hillary won,” Obama won in 2008 and 2012, so I am sure you have plenty of real life examples of the leftwing version of Franklin Graham’s tweets.

    Like

  52. Can’t comment on the tweet since it’s been taken down, but I must say that, to my way of thinking, any proposition, cause, product or person sponsored or promoted by Franklin Graham is not likely to be well received by me. Maybe it isn’t entirely fair to suppose that the message is (almost) always discredited by a discredited messenger, but I tend to think that, when he is being paid almost a million dollars per year for his efforts, as is reportedly the case with Graham, a messenger’s message is likely to have been corrupted. Perhaps I could be persuaded to make allowances if and to the extent Graham glorifies Jesus as king, but I am not aware that he is actually doing this. Maybe that’s because there isn’t as much profit in promoting our King as there is in promoting worldly political causes and personages.

    Like

  53. Gary!

    Didn’t you hear? Franklin was a first responder when Haiti crisis went down.

    I’m not entirely sure how we know this as Jesus told us not to toot our philanthropist horny horns 😂

    I’m guessing he sent out an email to his followers and supporters and donors about it.

    Subtle Haha

    Like

  54. David Cho,,

    I have better things to do than follow the tweets and political views of any clergy,, this particular write up attempted to combine spiritual abuse with a political tweet by someone connected with Tullian Tchividjian.

    And yes there are those that have proclaimed to vote for Hillary. It would be hard to google clergy voting Dem.. as matter of I’m facebook friends with one of them and he isn’t nearly as insulting as you.

    There are abusive clergy who voted for Trump that are hard core, Hyper-Calvinist who that I could never have anything to do with.

    The day of the election I had already accepted Hillary’s victory as either God’s will or God allowing it to happen.

    There is nothing wrong with being patriotic and voting for Trump doesn’t make me war-monger or misogyny.

    The hair-brain Scripture you fabricated is insulting and really stupid.

    Like

  55. Of course Franklin Graham’s organization has been active in Haiti. They are heavy recipients of US taxpayer dollars through the United States Agency for International Development to do just that.

    Like

  56. Mark, we might have a troll here (Cho). I feel it in the tone…ignore him, and he’ll go to play somewhere else.

    Like

  57. Mark, conflating the gospel with right wing politics (or leftwing politics, if that ever happens) is far more insulting. Sorry that you took my comment as an insult. It was to make a point about the conflation of rightwing politics with Christianity. Franklin Graham might take it as a compliment.

    You keep trying to create an equivalence (“if Graham supported Hillary”), but the only thing you have to offer are hypothetical scenarios. When asked to back them up with real life examples, you cop out.

    Yes I googled and found nothing. Sure there are Jim Wallis and others, but noway do they match up with their rightwing counterparts in numbers or influence. Not even close. The equivalence is false and baseless.

    Liked by 1 person

  58. Mark, you have “better things to do than follow clergy tweets?”

    I’m not really sure what you’re doing here then other than trying to tone police, which you apparently have plenty of time to do. If you’re not going to be up to speed on mainstream Christian trends, then that’s fine – it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but you might want to hesitate before speaking to the subject. Some of us have made a point of following this stuff.

    Like

  59. I’d be careful about drawing too-quick conclusions about who voted for Trump and why.

    From what I’ve read:

    Many of the white people who voted for Trump in 2016 voted for Obama twice, in previous presidential elections.

    A lot of women voted for Trump – the ones who acknowledged his sexism said they did not like his sexist comments from the past that were repeated in the news, but they felt Hillary would’ve been a worse choice.

    I saw a headline or two saying not as many evangelicals voted for Trump as was initially reported (this is just what I saw, I am not sure how accurate this is). If I can find that article again (I saw it go by in my Twitter account about a month ago) I will post it in this thread.

    Even if there were truckloads of evangelicals who did vote for Trump, there was a significant amount who came out strongly against him, so far as penning open letters or articles that were published on Christian news sites saying they didn’t agree with him being a nominee, including well-known Christian names such as Max Lucado and Russell Moore.

    _Many evangelicals favor Trump because he is not Clinton_ (Pew Research site)

    Sept 2016

    Evangelicals cite other reasons for supporting him beyond opposition to Clinton. Roughly one-third of evangelical Trump supporters also pointed to his issue positions as the main reason they support him, and about one-quarter (26%) mentioned his status as a political outsider who will bring change to the political system as a reason for backing him. One-in-five said they support him because of his personality and “tell-it-like-it-is” style.

    Like

  60. That is a reasonable take, Daisy.

    My beef is with so called leaders like Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell Jr. and John MacArthur who tell their followers that there was only one obvious choice for Christians in this past election. To them, it’s black and white and voting for Trump over Clinton is a no brainer and there is no room for disagreement.

    As to whether Graham’s tweet is spiritually abuse, you have to consider the source (Graham) and take into consideration his other public statements and tweets. He is a rightwing political hack. It would be okay if he kept his political views to himself, but he does not. He is very vocal, which leads people to believe rightwing conservatism and Christian faith are one and the same.

    Like

  61. Franklin Graham does tend to mingle politics and faith publicly a bit too much for my liking (I’d feel this way even if the guy was left wing).

    I do agree with the underlying substance of some of F. Graham’s points, but not all.

    Even when I find myself agreeing with F. Graham on a topic, I don’t always agree with how he communicates it – he can come on too strong, which unnecessarily offends a bunch of people.

    F. Graham’s organization, Samaritan’s Purse, does do some wonderful charity work, but, IMHO, that does not necessarily excuse or make-up for his public pronouncements intersecting Christianity and politics or social issues.

    I don’t want this to be construed as saying I think it’s wrong for Christians (famous or not) to publicly express their views (on politics or whatever other subject). I think it’s okay for them to do so, but I wish they would be more careful or responsible in how they go about it, and maybe not harp on cultural war stuff as much as they do.

    Like

  62. Gov Pappy,,

    Looks like you would make a pretty darn good Blog Cop yourself,,

    This thread as been a great resource for those of us that have experienced real Spiritual Abuse.

    I responded to a Fabricated re-wording of scripture by DC that I copy and pasted below,, now if you think that wouldn’t be insulting to you,, then you need to get your head examined.

    “We might as well rewrite Galatians 5:22-23

    But the fruit of the Spirit is capitalism, American Exceptionalism, patriotism, war-mongering, homophobia, Islamophobia, jingoism, misogyny, and Donald Trump.”

    Like

  63. David C said,

    Name one prominent religious leader from the left, and I will match ti with 5 from the right. Ready?

    Maybe the left wing does not have as many well-known religious (Christian) speakers for “their side” of things, but still, they get their message out on social media and blogs.

    Do you want there to be a left-wing equivalent to Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson? If so, why?

    I’m about as keen to see left-wingers get a famous left-wing spokes-head to obnoxiously bloviate on politics and social issues about as much as I want to see the Falwells, Pipers, and Robertsons do so – which is to say, not at all. 🙂

    Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton are rather left wing, and they do turn up on TV every so often to chip in their two cents on some political or social issues. (Or they used to, quite a bit.)

    You said,

    You are trying to draw an equivalence which in this case does not work. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly voted for Trump. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly favor conservatism. American Evangelicals overwhelmingly identify with the right wing of the political spectrum.

    There’s nothing necessarily wrong with a person being a Christian and being right wing, conservative, patriotic, etc.

    You said,

    My hyperbole, if you will, was a criticism directed at conflating political conservatism with Christianity. People think being Christian automatically means being a political rightwing conservative. It is a perception which conservative Evangelical Christians have cultivated for decades.

    I’d say there is some truth in that, yes. (I’m a right winger by the way.)

    I don’t think there’s enough charity on either side of this debate. I see some anti-Trump evangelicals (or anti-Trump secular liberals) who automatically attribute horrible motives to anyone who voted for Trump.

    You said (to Mark),

    …perhaps you can point out to tweets from prominent leftwing Christians from 2008 and 2012 crediting God for Obama’s wins

    Off the top of my head, I don’t recall any such examples, but that doesn’t mean that some left wing secularists or left wing Christians are not every bit as rude towards political opponents.

    Some left wingers are pretty condescending or rude to right wingers (and especially over Trump), but minus all the God-talk, which I don’t think is any friendlier. A person can be nasty without bringing God or Bible verses into things.

    You said (to Mark),

    Mark, conflating the gospel with right wing politics (or leftwing politics, if that ever happens) is far more insulting.

    I don’t know about celebrity Christians who do this, but I see plenty of normal, every-day, non-famous left wing Christians who conflate politics, social justice warrior causes, in with their Christianity – on Twitter, on Facebook, on blogs.
    I’ve seen some of them post memes suggesting that Jesus Christ is or was a socialist, and so on.

    Like

  64. I have no idea why you’re bringing that to my attention. That’s between you and David. Also, sure, call it policing all you want, I don’t care – the effect is that I’m holding you to own words that you don’t keep up with “clergy tweets”, which is literally the subject of this post, and trying to tell us who do that we’re making something out of nothing and causing dissension. I don’t understand.

    Like

  65. And for the record, what I’m doing here is the first comment on the post – my series of tweets on the subject partly spawned this post. I’ve been following it since to catch other insights.

    Liked by 1 person

  66. Gov,,

    You seemed to be asserting me as the Blog Police,,, you stuck you nose into something,, so I brought you up to speed,, and I have elected you as the new Blog Cop,,,

    Like

  67. Lydia’s post:

    “Not spiritual abuse at all, just a logc error. Sometimes i wonder whether the point of this blog is dissension.”
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    (Lydia replied):
    I would add, as a Libertarian, it has become obviously imbalanced. As in some victims are PC and some aren’t.

    I’ve noticed that too, that some groups are considered to be true victims worthy of protection and compassion, and some aren’t, and who gets the victim label is determined by left wing politically correct conventions (speaking in general terms here).

    I’m a right winger, but not so much on board with the GOP any more; sometimes I’m critical of the GOP. I’ve been more open to considering the liberal view on topics the last few years, so I began reading a lot more of their blogs and news sites, and so forth.

    Just like conservatives have their blind spots, I’ve noticed that liberals do as well.

    One of several issues in this area that drives me bonkers is Islam.
    I think that extremist Islam can and does pose a danger to society – almost any time a terrorist acts, it’s almost always some guy who is Muslim – not Presbyterian, Agnostic, Hindu, Baptist, Lutheran, or Jewish, for instance – so, I’d like to see the United States Govt. take national security far more seriously than they do.

    However, you can’t mention this in some venues, or some folks will assume or insist that you are Islamophobic, or they will mention that they personally know a Muslim guy or two who are super nice people who baked them wonderful apple pies once,

    Or, they have researched Islam out the wazoo for many years and are quite educated about it (they seem to really enjoy showing off their extensive knowledge), and they find Islam really great, so we shouldn’t view Islam as any sort of possible problem or threat.

    Those sorts of reactions (which I think is very naive and hence dangerous for national security) is very common from some commentators, including a few regulars, on another site both you and I visit quite a bit, and I find myself biting my tongue a lot when I’m at the other site on this issue. 🙂

    Like

  68. I think if the original post had contained a similar example from a left wing, public Christian figure commenting on politics and God, it might have gone over better.

    As it is, I can see how someone who is right wing who voted for Trump might take the original post the wrong way, as in a subtle dig against right wingers or Trump voters (disclaimer and reminder: I did not vote for anyone in election 2016, as I did not like any of the candidates).

    I’m not completely sure how the F. Graham tweet represents a case of spiritual abuse.
    I conceded above in another post that, yes, a lot of famous right wing Christians do publicly mingle their religion with politics quite a bit. I see F. Graham’s tweet to be more of the same of that.

    If I remember correctly, quasi- famous (as in, well-known among many Christians online) left wing Christians Rachel Held Evans and Jory Micah (could be wrong about Micah – she’s possibly A-political or moderately conservative?) were stumping for Hillary Clinton on their Twitter accounts. They were asking Christians to vote for Hillary and/or avoid Trump.

    On Huffington Post:
    _Why My Christian Faith Obligates Me to Support Hillary Clinton_ by Rick Hendrix

    I would take it that Mr. Hendrix is left wing, but I could be mistaken. Huff Post is definitely a left wing site.

    Various web page headlines:

    “EVANGELICAL LEADERS: TELL US TO VOTE FOR CLINTON”
    – on The Gospel Coaltiion site. Written by a guy who says he’s always voted Democrat before.

    This is a guest post from a friend, fellow church member, and leader at Anacostia River Church, Nick Rodriguez. By day, Nick works in education policy and reform. But he’s a full-time husband and father who loves the Lord Jesus Christ. The views expressed here are Nick’s. They do not represent the views of Anacostia River Church or The Gospel Coalition.

    Hillary Clinton Is Now The Most Religious Candidate Running For President. Here’s Why That Matters. – via Left Wing Site Think Progress by Jack Jenkins

    A Christian Vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 – by Ted Williams III, via Think Christian site

    Hillary Clinton: Eight Reasons this Jesus Freak Says “I’m With Her” – by Jon Trott – via Blue Christian blog

    Like

  69. _An Evangelical Makes Her Case For Clinton_ – via Politico

    And it’s not just because Clinton is the lesser of two evils. Though Trump certainly makes it easier.
    By KATIE ZAVADSKI November 02, 2016

    NEW YORK—Earlier this summer, Deborah Fikes, a former executive adviser of the World Evangelical Alliance, which represents some 600 million evangelical Christians in 129 countries, decided she needed to take a stand in the presidential race.

    Long before the hot-mic tape that would reveal Donald Trump’s propensity for groping women, Fikes determined the real estate mogul simply was unsuitable for the presidency. But the brief essay she wrote in the New York Times didn’t decry Trump’s extremely casual acquaintance with the Bible, his history of marital infidelity and his generally un-Christlike desire to always punch back twice as hard.

    She made a case that was almost unique among her fellow evangelicals:
    Hillary Clinton, she argued, was not the lesser of two evils but in actuality the more Christian candidate and therefore far more deserving of their support.

    Hillary Clinton Is the Best Choice for Voters Against Abortion – via The Christian Post, Oct 2016 headline, editorial by Eric Sapp

    Like

  70. Gov,,

    I have suggested that those of us that have endured real Spiritual Abuse have found refuge on this site. I don’t think politics has a place in this thread,, but it’s not my thread,,

    Though I don’t care to follow Graham,,, his political tweet is in no way Spiritual Abusive.

    If this blog wants to change direction and become politically motivated like MSNBC or Fox than I won’t need to look at this site to understand where real Spiritual Abuse is occurring.

    Strange hyperbole’s and innuendos have been assumed by those that want to scrutinize a tweet that clearly wasn’t abusive,, silly yes,, abusive no.

    My impression is you may not see anything wrong with that newly amended verse that was inappropriate as stereotyping those that voted for Trump,,

    But hey, since you are the new Blog cop,,, I’ll go along with whatever you say goes,, if that makes me mockery in your eyes, so be it.

    Like

  71. Ah, the tweet is back up. Graham is dishonestly employing a false dilemma or fallacy of false choice (L. Lee and Mark use alternative terms, false binary and false dichotomy) in an attempt to manipulate others into rejecting a proposition that is harmful to his own views. It is spiritually abusive because he basically attempts to put people in a position where they feel they must either reject that with Graham would have them reject, or else be opposed to God–or at least to God’s will.

    There is also a not so subtle and abusive message to the effect that Graham is God’s spokesperson, so that to disagree with Graham is to disagree with God. Graham thereby attempts to make himself to be accepted as an infallible and incontestable intermediary between God and His children. Graham attempts to manipulate us into, in effect, believing that we, the sheep, are not capable of hearing and knowing the voice of the One True Shepherd.

    By employing such manipulative tactics, Graham is playing the part of a spiritual bully.

    Liked by 1 person

  72. Mark,

    This is Twitter we are talking about.

    Franklin’s views aren’t limited to the internet.

    Can you imagine what it would be like to hold an opposing view and have your bum parked three times per week in ‘his church’ facility?

    Are you free to disagree and voice this within the camp?

    Or would that cause problems?

    If you’re an ‘elder’ on franklins boat for elders can you tweet disagreement and not be bullied?

    No.

    His tweet is arrogant to the max.

    Like

  73. Salty,,

    I have heard more insulting words from Hillary, Obama and Trump,,

    That tweet was his silly assertion and his need to prove the lack of Russian influence on the election,, which he really didn’t need to do.

    What makes Grahams tweet silly is when you think about it, the Russian’s didn’t need to influence the un-employed coal miner in Pennsylvania to vote for Trump,, Hillary admitted she wanted to shut them down.

    I’m not going to deny that Graham is a bully,, I don’t know him,, There are many preachers that wouldn’t graciously handle attenders that embrace contrary views as them, whether they lean liberal or conservative. Doesn’t make it right

    I find an amazing coincidence I find with this tweet even being brought up in the first place is the timing of the posts regarding Tullian Tchividjian which is where the focus should be,, not Graham

    That tweet wasn’t abusive,, it didn’t devastate anybody,, except maybe ruffle the feathers of those who didn’t vote for Trump,,

    But Trump, Hillary and Obama’s words were considerably more abusive and influential than Graham.

    The coverage by the author of this tweet may have offended her and others, and felt like she was enduring abuse but also political views must’ve played apart as well.

    Like

  74. Mark, I’ve said al along that politics don’t belong on this thread, yet you keep bringing up other politicians. I’m asking you to look at this tweet without thinking politically.

    Like

  75. “but also political views must’ve played apart as well.”

    That’s your opinion Mark.

    I’m not an American and I have no involvement in your election.

    When I read the tweet I didn’t think about politics.

    I thought about Franklin’s arrogant view regarding my God.

    Like JA points out… politics has nothing to do with her point.

    It’s about Franklin and HIS god.

    Take it from an outsider.

    Franklin gives no wiggle room for the Lord.

    And that’s a scary thought (Considering FG’s position and assumed ‘authority’)

    You voted Trump, didn’t you Mark?! 😂👍

    Like

  76. I voted for Trump, unapologetically so. I do not fee guilty for doing so, nor will be led to believe that I am another lower laity religious dog. I have been in both liberal and conservative churches who claim to speak for god (of their own understanding) on a regular basis with both sides of the fence doing a bang up job on making me out to believe and fell like a proverbial worm.

    This thread is the norm with regards to mixing religion and politics regardless if it’s Franklin (a Rep.) or his father, Billy (a Dem.), it becomes a heated debate resulting in personal attacks and speaking vanity in circles. There is such passion within the human heart regarding politics and yet, such passion is growing scarce when it comes to sharing the love of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the lost, or those who are professing Christ followers that are struggling and are in desperate need of that still small voice of a genteel reminder of Who exactly freely gave His life on that cross for the remission of their sins. Been on both sides of the fence there and am truly thankful for genuine humble believers to come along my side when life becomes very difficult.

    I am glad Julie Anne posted the comment made by Franklin Graham as it shows me that BOTH sides of the politicial/religious community speak jibberish when it comes down to ‘speaking for god.’ And fools love the sound of their own voices, especially those within Christendom who rely on the sales of their jesus junk to make a living.

    Marsha, when I read your comment, my heart cried for you. Had to run and get some Kleenex for thy eyes and nose, for you were spiritually abused. This is such an abomination unto our LORD, to label those whom disagree, as jezebels. This jezebel theology is getting old in a hurry and just plain sickening; I’ve heard the same song and dance from an Assembly of God pastor man before he was caught in his sexual sins. I am so very sorry Marsha that you had to endure such evil and wickedness and we need to label it as such, “wicked and evil.” Praying that you will overcome the vain words of man and cling to Jesus, the Head, of every born again believer, who loves His sheep like no other. Thank-you for sharing your experience here.

    During my years of idolizing politics over Jesus, I held to the belief system of the Dems first, then the Reps later. Personally, the redefining of the Galatians verse by David C. can actually be applied to political candidates in general regardless of their political flavor. Misogyny, capitalistic, etc. only applies to the Republican arena….I used to believe that myself until I placed my body/soul in a liberal church system. I can testify to the fact that those words easily apply to the Democratic elites as well their perceived lesser followers. Your penned words actually apply to mankind in general, thus a desperate need of sharing the Gospel within our own borders.

    To work hard with thine own hands, to earn a living and minding our own business is not a sin in this world. My hands look like the hands of a man, not too pretty and they wouldn’t be awarded a modeling contract for Dove soap, that’s for sure. They are ugly hands, but they are what the LORD gave me and will work those hands until my arthritis deems them crippled. My point here is this; working hard and providing for your family is commanded by our LORD, so is giving to help the needy, without the tongue wagging of its great goodness in the sight of men. Oh how we love to parade our good works, do we not? My sorry soul does this at times when needing to compete with the next church goer who brags what a great giver/do gooder are they. In my personal Bible study, this competitive spiritual competition is literally called ‘witchcraft’ of which no human soul is above this. We all struggle and fall short, I do much of the time and am called out on this when I am in literally in God’s Word. His Holiness is magnified by His Word.

    My point is this; I personally do not desire to receive monetary crumbs from my government, for I am called to earn a living. This is defined as capitalism by some, but more importantly are the Holy Scriptures admonishing man to provide a living for his family…..extended family and in some cases neighbors. I do not desire to have an oppressive government rule over me as in Jesus’ day, but in the natural, it may come to that here in America per the book of Revelation.

    continued ranting……

    Like

  77. Folks, I lost my healthcare this year, ending December 31st. I didn’t hear of any preacher man or woman prophecying into my life that this would happen. My family was dropped like a hot potato after paying volumes of mammon into a so called reputable private insurance company for years and years and years. We have been blessed to have relatively good health and are grateful to our LORD for that, however, now that our aging bodies are showing signs of decay, we will be more in need of good, wise healthcare in the future. So our insurance company did not drop us do to pre-existing conditions, it dropped us because of the changes made by Obamacare. I know, the truth hurts those of us who have honestly tried to live in such as way, realizing fully that our bodies are the literal “temple” of God, the Holy Spirit.

    And to add insult to injury, when I share this with those who proclaim to be believers and followers of Jesus, the Christ, I am met with a loud “silence.” There is no, “Wow, that is just terrible,” or “I am so sorry that this administration did this to you,” or “that is so unfair, I don’t know what to say,” or even a “Man, that’s a bummer, I will pray for you.”

    No, church folks who claim to be Christians are silent. And sometimes I believe they are sickened and depraved, and are actually happy that I/my family is experiencing hardship and injustice. I have been a chartered, papered member of a church who was primarily Democrat, that hated that fact we are experiencing success, growth, and most importantly, growth in Jesus Christ, apart from their interference. Maybe I am expecting too much from Christians per the Word of God, or perhaps this woman is the biggest fool.

    So I voted, not because of what the religious right says; I’ve had enough of their jibberish, or because of what the religious left says; more jibberish. I voted because this current administration punished me and took away my private healthcare. I chose not to vote in the last two elections because I felt there were no candidates to vote for, the character of political candidates has much to be desired.

    Bottom line, I don’t want our government lording it over my life any more than I desire to have religious leadership who doesn’t truly care about the condition of my soul/faith/family life, etc., becoming meddling busy bodies trying to destroy what our LORD is trying to do in my life. I know that we are to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling per Philippians and this is what many of us are trying to do. There is also more instruction/wisdom to be garnered from Chapter 2:

    “Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run in vain nor labored in vain.” Philippians 2:14-16

    And a happy ending….we have been accepted by a Christian healthcare organization that practices the New Testament Ekklesia model and I pray that it will strengthen my family spiritually as well as guard us naturally. All authority still belongs to Jesus per Matthew 28 and will continue to follow Him, humbled and exalted is HE.

    Like

  78. “Mark, I’ve said al along that politics don’t belong on this thread, yet you keep bringing up other politicians. I’m asking you to look at this tweet without thinking politically.”

    Yet you endorsed such with Gov Pappy’s tweet. How is posting his tweet keeping politics out of it? So Katy is a Klansman or Neo Nazi because of her vote? Maybe Pappy can answer that.

    Think of this, too. Every single person who goes around saying, “there but for the grace of God, go I” is using the same foundational view of God that Franklin is touting. Is that spriitual abuse, too?

    Like

  79. Oh lydia00,
    You are too funny! And no, I can personally testify or ‘stand my ground’ as I live in the man’s world here, that I’m not a klansman/woman or a neo Nazi (although my former generational kin fought against and for Hilter – a great family division there, many of whom were blinded by foolish propaganda).
    And I also don’t feel that I spiritually abuse people because I have been saved by the grace of God through our LORD Jesus Christ. Was saved in 1994 after living a Christless pagan life and desire never to return to such mire.
    Although lydia, I am reminded every day of the dung heap of sin of which Christ Jesus saved me from. So if our LORD chose to put all of us here on Julie Anne’s blog, in a room to share with one another and witness to one another, I dare say, that we may all leave the room after breaking bread and fellowshipping as they did in the Book of Acts…..that we may all walk away actually loving one another.
    I am convinced!

    Like

  80. @David Cho and Julie Anne

    The last place I want to be is on Julie Anne’s wrong side. Yes, I called David Cho a troll, but simply (and only because) of the little piece he had written in a comment about rewriting the Bible (it was unexpected, and perhaps I overreacted to it). My calling him a troll had NOTHING to do with politics, as I feel a naked hoot about politics or politicians. And if JA says David Cho is not a troll, then he is not a troll; and that’s good enough for me. I do apologize, David (and Julie Anne). I was wrong in calling you that.

    And, Katy, I am happy that you’ve found a new healthcare organization. Ultimately, let’s always keep Matthew 6:25-34 in mind.

    Liked by 1 person

  81. Like I have suggested and hasn’t been disputed, If Graham favored Clinton and Clinton won the election, I don’t think the author of this thread would’ve felt Spiritual Abused with Graham’s Tweet.

    Mark, that is a wrong assumption. Graham is a pastor and and a public Christian leader. I have a problem with any Christian leader, especially pastors, who use their platforms in a way to coerce people to vote a certain way or to believe their political way.

    Like

  82. Folks, I lost my healthcare this year, ending December 31st.

    I’m so sorry, Katy. That is rough. Happy that you’ve found something!

    Like

  83. Thank-you Boston Lady and Lea……there was a poster here awhile ago that made reference to seeking out a Christian alternative, perhaps it was shy1’s comment that proved to be so helpful. And also, appreciate the Matthew 6:25-34, another genteel reminder to ponder and live by.

    It’s good to let our God, speak for Himself, through His Words as this blog provides that reminder through His faithful sheep. Grateful for your words of encouragement, the LORD knows that there was a great need today. Blessings to you folks.

    Like

  84. “Mark, that is a wrong assumption. Graham is a pastor and and a public Christian leader. I have a problem with any Christian leader, especially pastors, who use their platforms in a way to coerce people to vote a certain way or to believe their political way.”

    Yet. Boz did it on twitter and you supported it.

    Like

  85. Julie Anne,,

    You are correct about making assumptions,, the timing of this silly political tweet and Graham’s association with Tullian Tchividjian, must’ve been a complete coincidence.

    This thread has many contributors that didn’t vote the same and personally I can see why anyone who didn’t vote for Trump be “annoyed” by Graham’s dumb guffy tweet,, but not spiritually abused. Graham isn’t the only preacher exposing his guffy opinions.

    Graham’s silly, annoying tweet was very political, which isn’t uncommon by preachers, liberal or conservative.

    I can completely see someone being annoyed by that tweet, yes of course, spiritually abused,, no, not even close.

    Julie Anne, your Blog has been an invaluable resource to me and the way you and I endured spiritual abuse was by preachers that embraced the same hyper-theology who also embraced sinful methodologies and the cruel way they force fed their doctrine to some, while over-looking behavior of those that didn’t question their hyper-doctrine.

    I’m sure, you could’ve found a non-political tweet of Graham’s just as annoying and arrogant and made a big write up on it,, but you chose a political one,, and declared his Pro-Trump political tweet as spiritual abuse and that is why I made that assumption,,

    David Cho’s newly fabricated bible verse fueled fire to my assumption.

    Like

  86. Grateful for your words of encouragement, the LORD knows that there was a great need today. Blessings to you folks.

    To you as well! I’ve been avoiding the political threads like the plague so I’m glad I popped in just for this.

    Like

  87. Julie Anne,,

    I’m not sure if you realize how sensitive I am when it comes to Spiritual Abuse,, I didn’t sleep for 3 years praying and trying to understand what was happening to our little church. You actually helped!!

    Anything political is touchy to me,, which is why I’m taken back by that political tweet being exposed by that particular Preacher.

    I’d like to emphasize that I’m sure, you could’ve found a non-political tweet of Graham’s just as annoying and arrogant while exposing real abuse and made a big write up on it,, but you chose a political one,, and declared his Pro-Trump political tweet as spiritual abuse and that is why I made the assumption this was more political as many on this thread is mentally distraught with Trump’s election.

    David Cho’s fabricated bible verse didn’t help

    Like

  88. @Mark and Boston Lady,

    I apologize for the tone and language of the rewrite of Galatians 5:23.

    It was not directed at anyone in this thread or even Trump supporters. It was directed at Christian leaders who conflate rightwing politics with Christian faith. It was directed at those who view their rightwing political views as the only worldview in line with Christian biblical values If that does not reflect your worldview, it simply does not apply to you. Even if it does, I could have had chosen my words better. Franklin Graham was the primary target of my criticism.

    @Daisy
    I appreciate your research, but nobody that you have uncovered approaches anywhere near the stature of Franklin Graham. The Evangelical community in terms of political leanings is skewed overwhelmingly to the right, and I think you agree.

    Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are not even considered Evangelicals, and besides Rachel Held Evans, I have not heard any of the names you have uncovered. Trust me, I keep up with trends in Evangelicalism. While I appreciate their effort to untangle the Evangelical community from right wing politics, they are outfunded and outnumbered. They are spitting into the wind. So I don’t know how in anyone’s mind, that the likes of Rachel Held Evans somehow negate Franklin Graham’s demagoguery and the left and right are equally culpable in politicization of Evangelicalism.

    That said, l am not on board with much of what Rachel Held Evans does. She too is politicizing the faith.

    Like

  89. @David Cho:

    Thanks, apology accepted, but it’s already in the past, David. Forget about it. Let’s concentrate on the abusers and the abused and the damage these evil abusers do (in all its despicable flavors), and let’s support this site, one another, and expose the abusers, but exalt one another in Christ. Things are tough (even horrible and unbearable) David, for many of us, and that’s why we are here.
    Hey, I make more faux pas than a five-legged, left-footed, clumsy djit.

    Blessings to you over the festive season.

    Like

  90. David Cho,,

    I apologize to you as well for not only being so defensive but also my selection of words toward you and others and maybe even putting any input in the first place.

    If this thread wants to isolate a really guffy political tweet then I should’ve turned a blind eye and stay silent even if I think there are other non-political tweets that are just as arrogant.

    Graham’s political leanings may be the same as mine, I’m sure Julie Anne’s old Pastor O’Neil’s is the same as well. But to me their political views and opinions when it comes to politics and faith, have nothing to do with abuse,

    Like

  91. @ David said I appreciate your research, but nobody that you have uncovered approaches anywhere near the stature of Franklin Graham. The Evangelical community in terms of political leanings is skewed overwhelmingly to the right, and I think you agree.

    Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are not even considered Evangelicals, and besides Rachel Held Evans, “… That is irrelevant. They are famous Christians (the flavor of which matters not). And they are left wing. And they promote liberal candidates.

    Left wingers, both secular and Christian, are just as pushy and obnoxious about politics as right wingers are – maybe even more so, because many liberals claim to be “tolerant.” They are anything but.

    At least right wingers don’t run around stating they are uber-tolerant, multi-cultural, and support identity politics. Those things are not at the core of conservatism.

    I think conservatives like to see similarities among people and unite them, rather than play the liberal game of “how are we all different” and divide everyone.

    Liberals enjoy playing “Victim and Oppression Olympics” with each other, and it’s very strange to watch.
    For example, I’ve seen black and white liberal secular feminists get into fights on social media over who has things worse, black women or white women?

    I asked above: do you WANT there to be a left wing equivalent of Franklin Graham? I sure don’t.

    Many left wingers are hostile towards Christianity or faith in general (except oddly, they will defend Islam, and Islam is by and large harmful to women).

    Left wingers and many Democrats do not like evangelicalism or traditional values, which is probably why you do not see as many left wing equivalents to Franklin Graham.
    By and large, a sizable number of Liberals / Democrats are anti-Christian bigots – which is no better than a Christian like F. Graham conflating God with politics.

    _Democrats Boot God From Convention Platform_ – Sept 2012

    Democrats heckle preacher during opening prayer – via Fox by Ted Starnes, 2015

    They [Democrats at Democratic convention] literally heckled the poor lady [Hillary Clinton] – booing and jeering right in the middle of her petition to the Almighty.

    At some point the jeers turned into chants for Bernie Sanders, “Bernie, Bernie…”

    To be clear — they were not chanting the name of Jesus Christ the Savior — they were chanting the name of Bernie Sanders the socialist.

    They turned a moment of quiet meditation and reflection into UFC Fight Night.

    Was it too much to assume the Democrats would show a little bit of reverence?

    Then again — I was at their convention in 2012 — when they not only booed God — but they tried to vote the Almighty out of their party platform.

    Like

  92. Correction. I said above:

    They [Democrats at Democratic convention] literally heckled the poor lady [Hillary Clinton]

    That should read:

    They [Democrats at Democratic convention] literally heckled the poor lady [Rev. Cynthia Hale – who was praying in support OF Hillary Clinton] ….

    Also, my block quote tag did not work above.

    David’s quote ended at, “and besides Rachel Held Evans…”

    While my comments started with,
    “That is irrelevant. They are famous Christians (the flavor of which matters not). And they are left wing. And they promote liberal candidates.”

    Like

  93. @Boston Lady and Mark

    No problem. Here is to productive dialogue in the future.

    @Daisy, I think you missed my point about left wingers of Franklin Graham’s prominence.

    As to the “left” being hostile to Christianity, the left is hostile to the conservative brand of Christianity just as the right is to the liberal elements of Christianity. It’s really the left hating on the right and visa versa. So I vehemently disagree with the Christians vs liberal dichotomy peddled by the right.

    Look at it this way. You disagree with people like Jesse Jackson on policy issues. That does not make you racist (even though some misguided leftwingers would like you to think that). Disagreeing with people like Franklin Graham does not make you anti-Christian. Do you get the analogy? When I am critical of rightwing Christians, my criticism is directed at the rightwing part, not their Christian faith.

    As a side point, I used to be on board with rightwing politics. I am very familiar with and used to be in agreement with all the talking points in your posts.

    Like

  94. @DavidCho:

    For those of us old enough to have endured the apocalyptic hysteria of the 70’s, and 80’s and read best sellers like “The Late, Great Planet Earth” by Hal Lindsey, Russia was supposed to be the mortal enemy of Israel and God (War of Gog and Magog). Has biblical prophecy changed now that the leaders of the Religious Right find themselves enamored with Russia and Putin?

    Remember when the Mormons ceased to be A Cult Cult Cult when Romney defeated all the God’s Anointed Next Presidents in the 2012 primaries and cinched the GOP nomination as The Great White Hope?

    Like

  95. @Mark:

    That is the thing I don’t like about clergy exposing their political views, is they think because they are clergy that they have better political insight about who they think is the right candidate and are confident in their position they can proclaim it, whether they are Dem or a Pub.

    “If you vote for someone just because your favorite rock star says to, you’re dumber than we are!”
    — Alice Cooper (from memory)

    Like

  96. Headless,,,,

    lol,, sometimes with the undecided voters who doesn’t understand what their candidate economically or socially believes in, the rock star might be their only barometer.
    -Mark

    Like

  97. @Headless Unicorn Guy

    Remember when the Mormons ceased to be A Cult Cult Cult when Romney defeated all the God’s Anointed Next Presidents in the 2012 primaries and cinched the GOP nomination as The Great White Hope?

    Yep. What Headless Unicorn Guy is referring to.


    Billy Graham No Longer Thinks Mormonism Is a Cult

    When Franklin Graham was asked about the removal:

    Franklin Graham Was ‘Shocked’ to Find Mormonism Is a Cult Article on BGEA Site

    “Shocked”? Really? I have always been taught that Mormonism is a cult. Remember Kingdom of the Cults by Walter Martin?

    Like

  98. Marsha,

    You are so welcome! I truly believe those who label women as jezebels are actually engaging in their own “self fulfilling prophecy.” These strong words which are meant to tear down and not edify what so ever, are used by weak individuals when they feel threatened or are losing an argument; in Christianese terms, its’ called “a debate.”

    And to date, every individual that has used the “jezebel threat” in my neck of the woods has been “caught” in a sexual sin all of their own making. And you have just as much of a right to speak and have your views as any other within the context of humanity……Please never stop speaking Marsha, you are valued!

    David C,
    Thank-you for pointing out the hypocrisy with the Grahams, it’s there in black and white. The history of Billy Graham actually involves bringing all religions into that one worldview through subtle ecumenism. It’s like that conservative church down the road who claims to have the truth market on Jesus, yet practices Hindu yoga within the confines of its walls. Thus, jesus then becomes a hindu guru designed to give us a spiritual high through kundalini spiritism. Pretty scary stuff!

    And at the end of the day here, Julie Anne is actually “right.” Religious leaders, especially those who are garnering vast amounts of income/mammon resulting from religion, actually have no voice in speaking for our LORD. God has already saith.

    Like

  99. Katy,, This election was painful for a lot of people,, I’m not suggesting Graham’s political wasn’t guffy and a tad bit arrogant and being insensitive toward those who didn’t support Trump, but I don’t see the abuse,

    One of the hidden things I see (or assume) by Julie Anne isolating Graham’s tweet, is that he essentially supported Trump and that is another reason for those who didn’t vote for Trump, to not like Graham.

    And really, that is what I’m seeing is America, there are a lot anti-Trump voters being prejudicial toward those that voted for him.

    But there are a lot of us who voted for Trump, who won’t admit it,, this is the only forum that I have.

    Like

  100. One of the hidden things I see (or assume) by Julie Anne isolating Graham’s tweet, is that he essentially supported Trump and that is another reason for those who didn’t vote for Trump, to not like Graham.

    Mark, you are assuming too much once again. The reason I have issues with Franklin Graham have nothing to do with Trump. You keep talking about politics and voting and my reasons for posting tweet this have nothing to do with politics, but the way he pigeonholed people to only have his narrow opinion. Read Gary W’s comment on why he thinks Franklin is spiritually abusive. I did a very in-depth post about Franklin and his handling of Saeed Abedini. I’ve learned a lot about him in the Saeed case from people who dealt with him personally. It was not good.

    Like

  101. Julie Anne,,

    Graham’s tweet in this instance was a political one,, as he clearly exposed his political view. (at least he did to me)

    I know you have stated that is not your intent to politicize, a political tweet.

    But it is still a political tweet he fabricated that caused you to do a write up.

    I can see how a political tweet like that could frost someone’s cookies if they didn’t like Trump, (heck I didn’t like it either and I voted for Trump) as it was a silly political tweet that was “insensitive”,
    (especially to those who are going through real trauma, because of Hillary’s defeat)

    I’d like to isolate the word “insensitive” as it is a quality many abusers have a lot of. Maybe that is where you are seeing the abuse.

    Maybe what I see is that dumb political tweet annoying the h*ll out of us, more than I see abuse.

    This is your blog, and I appreciate you taking a little time and allowing me to state my opinion even though we disagree.

    I don’t follow Graham, as much as you do, I’m sure there are far more arrogant tweets or words he said that aren’t political in nature.

    Dem and Pub Preachers use public forum to expose their political preferences and they aren’t exactly being sensitive to those that disagree or how we feel when they do it..

    Does that mean when clergy expose their political views, in an annoying way, whether they support Hillary or Trump, are being Spiritual Abusive?

    I don’t think exposing political views have a place when it comes to spiritual matters, because they often collide and create division, nearly as much as abortion among Christians who support Roe V Wade and those that don’t.

    How Graham handled Saeed,, is far more note worthy in my view, than you exposing Graham’s guffy political tweet, which in this case may have added fuel to the fire to anyone who is distraught over Hillary’s defeat. Especially if one cried or was angered on election night.

    Anything political, can be very emotional by itself,, look at the woman in Ohio freaking out on Dec 19th when the electors had to cast their vote for the voters of Ohio.

    I fail to see annoying and arrogant political tweets by someone we don’t care for, compared to real abuse practiced by Saeed Abedini. But I can see Graham’s being even more super annoying to you, by his political tweet because of his handling of Saeed.

    I did read Gary W’s comment.

    Like

  102. Mark,

    Franklin Graham is a public figure. We should not evaluate the tweet at hand in a vacuum. We should considered the source as well as the context. He is an insufferable political hack for the far right and the tweet is just a tip of an iceberg.

    Even Graham’s defense of Saeed Abedini has rightwing politics written all over it inline with his anti-Islam/Iran narrative. Pictures of his time in Iran emerged which appear to contradict his account of mistreatment and brutality. Has Graham or Abedini offered an explanation? I doubt they even care. They discard anything that does not serve their political agenda.

    Like

  103. David C.

    That political tweet may have been “insensitive” but it was not Spiritual Abuse,,

    There is enough to talk about Graham’s defense of Saeed Abedini than focus on whether Graham embraces rightwing politics or whether or not you embrace leftwing politics..

    By exposing a political tweet and thereby exposing his political view in a forum where there are a fair amount of followers who may embrace political views contrary to his and who may have experienced trauma, cried and angered by Hillary’s defeat, may have discovered a brand new form of abuse fabricated out of thin air, based on political ideology,,

    David, you only solidified my opinion about Graham’s odd political tweet,, when you emphasized that it is in fact Graham’s defense of Saeed (among other things) that is the real targeted issue, at hand.

    Graham’s political views may actually be a distraction, but also give additional cause for left wingers on this thread reason to be more infuriated,, based on a political tweet that was insensitive.

    Like

  104. I disagree, Mark. Graham is a pastor and a spiritual leader. When he uses his words to a vast audience, he is speaking as a spiritual leader. He is asking whether Trump was elected because of Russians or God. He allows for no other decision and so if you have another decision, the implication is that yours is wrong.

    Again, take politics aside, he used his position as a spiritual leader to imply that God put Trump in office. So in essence, he’s speaking for God. That is spiritual abuse.

    Like

  105. Graham appears with Donald Trump at a “thank you” rally

    “I don’t have any scientific information. I don’t have a stack of emails to read to you. But I have an opinion: I believe it was God. God showed up. He answered the prayers of hundreds of thousands of people across this land who had been praying for this country,”

    And yes, Mark. I’d be just as appalled if Graham appeared at Hillary’s rally and said the same.

    Julie Anne is right. I heard a speaker giving an analogy in describing spiritual abuse. One day his two young children were fighting over a toy. After arguing over the toy for a few minutes, the older son said to his little brother:

    “Mom and Dad said I can have it”

    The kid’s Mom and Dad never said that. But instead of making a case for himself, he put words in Mom and Dad’s mouths.

    Franklin Graham is no better than that child. Actually, what Frank Graham does is an egregious violation against the commandment to take God’s name in vain. He is throwing around God’s name to fit his own agenda.

    Like

  106. David, that is absolutely spiritual abuse because it says that God only answered the prayers of those who voted the way he – Franklin Graham, wanted. Again, this is not a partisan issue. ANY pastor or spiritual authority who claims that God showed up or answered their prayers for WHOMEVER they voted for is using their spiritual position inappropriately. They are in essence saying that they have a direct line with God that no one who voted another way did not have. That is so wrong. If Graham was pro Hillary and said the same thing if she won, I’d still be calling him out.

    Like

  107. Julie Anne,

    To me it was clear his political preference in that political tweet or political thought.

    I’m not so sure he was speaking for God but instead referring to God’s word, as there is scripture that explains where the source of power comes from, whether the leader is good or bad.

    As a matter fact, the morning of the election, I accepted the outcome as God’s will based on John 19 10-11 on whoever won the election and was actually at peace with it.

    In John 19:10-11 Christ rebuked Pilate for his arrogance for not recognizing where the source of his authority came from.

    10 So Pilate said to Him, “You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?”
    11 Jesus answered, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.”

    Graham’s political tweet was political rhetoric and insensitive and based on God’s word, redundant, because in my mind he exposed political preference, it was not spiritual abuse.

    Now if you consider all preachers Dem or Pub, exposing their political preference as Spiritual Abuse, that would be consistent.

    It would surprise me that Graham’s political tweet would’ve been on your radar screen if he didn’t get mixed up with Saeed (among others) based on what David C. just wrote to me.

    If you consider all clergy Dem or Pub, exposing their political preference as Spiritual Abuse and not just isolate Graham’s political tweet it would seem a more consistent approach..

    Some clergy won’t always name name’s, they’ll just isolate a flaw by the obvious candidate they dislike or isolate a strength of the obvious candidate they like,, maybe it happened to you, in you church,,

    I don’t even know who my pastor voted for or didn’t vote for and I’m glad. His messages didn’t have anything remotely close to having isolated flaws from any candidate. I sense he is moderate leaning maybe slightly liberal,, doesn’t matter.

    Now if you know who your Pastor didn’t vote for, a pastor who accepted a calling by God, a pastor in the political know with God,, would that be considered Spiritual Abuse?

    I would find it difficult to think a clergy exposing a political tweet like that as Spiritual Abuse, whether Clinton or Trump won.

    -Mark

    Like

  108. David C,,

    There are many Dem and Pub preachers across this country that expose their political views, which I have repeatedly said it is a bad idea.

    If you consider any preacher exposing their political likes and dislikes or exposing political tweets and political rhetoric as Spiritual Abuse and not isolate Graham at least you would be consistent.

    You already explained to me your real beef is Graham’s mishandling of the Saeed issue,, you mentioning that Graham is a right winger is another issue you had.

    Graham’s political tweet was in my opinion, a right winger making a political tweet.

    -Mark

    Like

  109. Now if you consider all preachers Dem or Pub, exposing their political preference as Spiritual Abuse, that would be consistent.

    I do not consider all preachers who air their political preference as spiritual abuse. Not at all.

    It would surprise me that Graham’s political tweet would’ve been on your radar screen if he didn’t get mixed up with Saeed (among others) based on what David C. just wrote to me.

    You are wrong. I have been following Graham far longer than since covering the Saeed situation. I have long believed that Graham uses his position as spiritual leader to control others to follow his teachings and political positions.

    If you consider all clergy Dem or Pub, exposing their political preference as Spiritual Abuse and not just isolate Graham’s political tweet it would seem a more consistent approach.

    Once again, you are not understanding me. Franklin Graham does far above just exposing political preference. David C. posted another quote about how he uses his public position to claim he hears from God more than others, that he has inside information, and there is a clear implication that those who do not follow his ways (politically) are not being godly.

    Some clergy won’t always name name’s, they’ll just isolate a flaw by the obvious candidate they dislike or isolate a strength of the obvious candidate they like, maybe it happened to you, in your church.

    My pastor did not name any names. He did not try to impose his political opinion on his congregants. If he had, he would have heard from me.

    Now if you know who your Pastor didn’t vote for, a pastor who accepted a calling by God, a pastor in the political know with God, would that be considered Spiritual Abuse?

    Only if he used his position to control or manipulate people to “his side.” A pastor is to shepherd, not to tell people who to vote for or use wording to shame people who didn’t vote the “right way.” Frankly, a pastor should not be discussing politics, but should be preaching the Word of God.

    Like

  110. Julie Anne,,

    As I suggested earlier:
    I’m not so sure Graham was speaking for God but instead referring to God’s word, as there is scripture that explains where the source of power comes from, whether the leader is good or bad. Maybe one of the reasons he made that tweet was a lot of protests’ and freaking out after the election and now the Dems are blaming Russians.

    As a matter fact, the morning of the election, I accepted the outcome as God’s will based on John 19 10-11 on whoever won the election and was actually at peace with it.

    In John 19:10-11 Christ rebuked Pilate for his arrogance for not recognizing where the source of his authority came from.

    10 So Pilate said to Him, “You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?”
    11 Jesus answered, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.”

    In your extensive research of abuse and doctrine Graham may have been popping up,, long before and courting candidates of his choice,, the part of campaigning I don’t like.

    I’m glad that your pastor doesn’t use timely messages during the campaign season that target a specific topic, like how he could vote for a certain person who is a certain, and then ignore the other character flaws that are just as toxic. It would be even better if he was so neutral (like my pastor) that you don’t know who he voted or didn’t vote for.

    We had someone in our church fill in behind the pulpit 2 weeks before the election who did just that, not naming names, but clearly critical of Trump and giving Clinton a free pass as unfortunately he unconsciously exposed his party affiliation.

    Like

  111. Mark, if you follow Franklin Graham long enough, you can understand the fuller context of the tweet. It is because of that knowledge of how he claims to believe that his way (Franklin’s ways) are always God’s ways, and thus, anyone who disagrees with Franklin, is disagreeing with God. In the fuller context of all of his words (I also follow him on Facebook), he is still a spiritual abuser. And please notice once again, it has nothing to do with politics, but the way in which he uses his position of authority to say his ways are the right ways, the only way to believe if you are a Christian. This is toxic.

    Like

  112. I don’t question Graham’s questioned past or his ability to emphasize or verbally “force feed” his will.

    The basis of this political tweet,, is because of his personal faith and probably the bible verses like the one I shared to you. John 19:10-11

    There is so much rhetoric in the media floating around after the election about Russians, Protests and “He’s not my President”, Hillary supporters being traumatized, that causes certain Preachers, Clergy and Political figures to expose their political views.

    I can see how a political tweet like Graham’s frost your cookies, especially if you didn’t vote for Trump. I saw a lot of rhetoric on the other side that supported Hillary and it frosted my cookies, but I never consider it Spiritual Abuse.

    I have a liberal retired Preacher facebook friend with with probably a thousand friends who daily posts annoying far left rhetoric views..half the time and the other half exposing his spiritual views,, I don’t consider that Spiritual Abuse. but I do think he is being inconsiderate to the friends that he knows don’t appreciate it.

    I also think Graham’s political tweet is inconsiderate like my liberal facebook friend’s postings.

    I also agree with your assertion that preachers have a “it’s my way or the highway” arrogant swagger.

    Like

  113. Julie Anne; for a second I thought you’d written “ham in the church.” I’d be there! Just say when! Darn, then I saw you’d written harm.
    Now, if only I could find a mistletoe and a ham (I mean a man) to kiss, then I’d be happy. Dear Lord, I hate this time of the year.

    Liked by 1 person

  114. Julie Anne,, I didn’t think I was going to change your mind, but I appreciate the dialogue.

    I read an interesting piece on a preacher that I have admired for years, though I haven’t followed in the last decade (the 2 towel man) TD Jakes using his Pastoral to influence support for Hillary.

    Like Graham, Jakes is able to use his calling, using spiritual insight to justify his ideology as way to influence the “flock”.

    I don’t like what either Graham or TD Jakes are doing, because it is divisive, but because it doesn’t directly impact me, other than their attempt to either sway an election or champion the results as being arrogant (like we can’t think for ourselves),, I still can’t see abuse,

    Thanks,,,

    Like

  115. @Kay:

    Agree with Sister. They all want to stay relevant so they can write books. Guess Franklin will say that anyone that dares to question Trump questions God.

    Above and beyond angling for a Kingmaker’s night in the Lincoln Bedroom, is Franklin planning to make an enormous graven image of The Trump and have it come to life to decree that anyone who dares to question The Trump…?

    Like

  116. @KAS:

    I’m afraid I think the reference to the Russians is a hangover from the cold war and the need for an enemy. The Soviet Union has gone.

    The USSR is gone, but it’s successor state under President and Autocrat Putin remains as a rival with its own ideas on Manifest Destiny.

    Like

  117. @BostonLady:

    Julie Anne; for a second I thought you’d written “ham in the church.” I’d be there! Just say when! Darn, then I saw you’d written harm.

    Well, there ARE a lot of hams in the pulpits…
    (Or on Twitter…)

    Like

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s