[BC] Non-tech: Religion

[Sherrod Munday]

On Wednesday 28 December 2005 11:25, Rich Wood wrote:
> ------ At 10:45 AM 12/28/2005, WFIFeng at aol.com wrote: -------
>
> > Mr Graham has, for all of these
> >years, been a fine example of what a *Genuine*, Bible-Believing Christian
> > is like, and how we are to live.
>
> I'm afraid the Reverend Billy Graham is greatly outnumbered by
> scamsters, especially in religious broadcasting.

My only $0.02 logical train of thought on this (non-tech) topic:

If the "religious" hucksters are wrong because they aren't sincere or genuine, 
then we shouldn't believe what they have to say or what they are doing, 
right?

The corollary to this supposition is that if the hucksters are wrong, someone 
else must be right.  (It is definable that if there is a wrong, there must be 
a right (or else there is no such thing as wrong).  The same holds true of 
"evil" and "good" ; there cannot be one without the other against which to 
contrast it.  Along the same lines, "light" cannot be judged without 
contrasting it to "darkness".  At some point *all* such contrasts may and 
*must* be measured against an absolute standard, not a perception or personal 
opinion.)

In reviewing the posts so far on this topic, it seems to be the consensus that 
Billy Graham not only *preaches* but also lives an upright lifestyle.
If the scamsters are wrong, then can we conclude that someone like Billy 
Graham (who does not live hypocritically or judgementally, and does not go 
about seeking donations as his primary motive) is right?  If someone like 
that is right, then do you believe what he says and preaches?

All this is entrenched in the understanding that if we don't believe in and 
agree with something that is wrong and evil, then if the diametrical opposite 
(i.e. something that is right and good) is presented we should then logically 
believe in it instead.  Otherwise, we would be (at best) just judgemental and 
hypocritical ourselves.

As Billy Graham says (to answer the question of "what does one have to do to 
be saved?"): "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."  
Actually, Mr. Graham was just quoting what God said in the Bible.  (If you 
don't like that statement, don't argue with me -- God said it, so argue with 
Him.  He's capable of defending His own Words.  I'll happily explain 
*off-list* as much as I humanly can, but God doesn't need *me* to _defend_ 
His Word.)  

God made it pretty plain and simple how to be saved -- it's we imperfect 
humans that have twisted and politicized it to the point that it seems 
difficult and contradictory.  That plus a bunch of people proclaiming 
themselves as "Christian" when their lifestyle and behavior belie them (as 
not following what God says) go a long way to being a poor example of how to 
be saved.

For those of you that may be searching and wondering how to be saved, I will 
personally apologize for my part in how the collective church (regardless of 
creed or denomination) has fallen very short in presenting the Gospel to you.  
We should have been doing a better job of living it and explaining it all 
along.

For a simple summary explanation, visit:
http://www.eeinternational.org/DYKFS/DYKFS.htm

-- 
Sherrod Munday <smunday at srnradio.com>
Technical Director
Salem Radio Network    (972) 831-1920