T.D. Jakes Blasts Graham for Questioning Obama's Faith

[wyguy]

T.D. Jakes Blasts Graham for Questioning Obama's Faith

Bishop T.D Jakes believes Franklin Graham should apologize for questioning President Barack Obama

[Matthitjah]

Mt 7:16

Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

[Guest yod]

This is why the church is dying. So-called "leaders" have no discernment or courage to speak the truth. No, Mr Jakes there is more to it than putting words together into a sentence that says "I believe in an undefined Jesus Christ" (especially since the Jesus being preached at the churches he attends is a phony)

Even the demons "believe".

If he was truly a seeker, that would be different but he's not. He's using this situation for political gain, trying to divide people with a lie about who he is. He is whatever he thinks his present audience wants him to be.

[Ddavid from NC]

There is probably nothing wrong when Graham responding to the question with a clarification of what being "Born Again" means. Then simply stating that he hasn't heard the President clarify his understanding or lack of understanding of what it means to be a "Born Again" believer as described to by Jesus to the religious Nicodemus in John 3. I think Jakes is right in saying that Graham seems to prefer having an answer to a tough political question with the cameras on, than staying in position Biblically or staying in a position of possibly being a positive influence on the President. Personally, I don't sense our Commander in Chief has a Biblical understanding of the narrow way into the Kingdom. I believe he like his predecessor he believes that Allah and Jehovah are one in the same. Because he doesn't know the Scripture. That ignorance suggests to me he has never seen Christ for who he is. By the way, Muslims have no problem recognizing the wisdom of the precepts of Christ that they carefully select tout. My conclusion, Graham is probably right.....but TD Jakes is probably right questioning his motivation and wisdom of expressing himself publicly.

[nebula]

I respect Billy Graham a lot. Unfortunately, there were holes in his method. The evidence was manifest in the high percentage of people who made commitments but did not stick with it. His message was popular for being all-embracing, but it lacked the actual denial of self. Maybe I could say Billy Graham's method was to scatter seeds everywhere, with the majority falling on the wrong soil. Franklin's method is better at scattering his seed on good soil. And thus, people don't like what he has to say.

(I hope I expressed that right.)

[Ddavid from NC]

I respect Billy Graham a lot. Unfortunately, there were holes in his method. The evidence was manifest in the high percentage of people who made commitments but did not stick with it. His message was popular for being all-embracing, but it lacked the actual denial of self. Maybe I could say Billy Graham's method was to scatter seeds everywhere, with the majority falling on the wrong soil. Franklin's method is better at scattering his seed on good soil. And thus, people don't like what he has to say.

(I hope I expressed that right.)

I agree with you...I heard a preacher say that so many throw open the gates of heaven, but more accurately we should probably preach to disqualify...because the world's message of universalism is being preached hard and so many don't have what is real. But, I would suggest that taking pot shots at the Presidents unqualified statement of faith without being in his presence is just grandstanding. Ronald Reagan (who personally liked) shrugged his shoulders like Nicodemus at the term "Born Again". But nobody is questioning his placard that says he was a Christian. Why because the religious right like him... Jimmy Carter said I'm "Born Again" in his Playboy interview and teaches Sunday School every Sunday but can't understand why Evangelicals consider Mormons to be heretics....but no one questions his salvation. You get my point, whether Obama is a Muslim or not doesn't really seem to be a concern for winning him to Christ, but defeating him in the public arena of opinion.

[PeterH]

I agree with you...I heard a preacher say that so many throw open the gates of heaven, but more accurately we should probably preach to disqualify...because the world's message of universalism is being preached hard and so many don't have what is real. But, I would suggest that taking pot shots at the Presidents unqualified statement of faith without being in his presence is just grandstanding. Ronald Reagan (who personally liked) shrugged his shoulders like Nicodemus at the term "Born Again". But nobody is questioning his placard that says he was a Christian. Why because the religious right like him... Jimmy Carter said I'm "Born Again" in his Playboy interview and teaches Sunday School every Sunday but can't understand why Evangelicals consider Mormons to be heretics....but no one questions his salvation. You get my point, whether Obama is a Muslim or not doesn't really seem to be a concern for winning him to Christ, but defeating him in the public arena of opinion.

Obama is a very public leader and as a leader people follow him. When he proclaims I'm a Christian then says things like this :

"So, I have a deep faith," Obama continues. "I'm rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people. "

( Obama flashback: There is no heaven or hell, all ways lead to the same path )

people will follow him as a leader and adopt that same line of thinking. If we as true Christians don't say "Hey wait a minute!! That's not True!!" then how can we say we're concerned about winning people for Christ? If a leader is professing to be Christian ie having a personal relationship with Jesus the Christ and does not bear the fruits in his life that entails then we need to be vigilant to let people know that what that leader is doing is not an example of Christ. And I say that concerning all leaders. The men you mentioned may be good men, Obama may be a good man, but does not give them passes to mock God.

^{Ephesians 6:12} For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

[Ddavid from NC]

I agree with you...I heard a preacher say that so many throw open the gates of heaven, but more accurately we should probably preach to disqualify...because the world's message of universalism is being preached hard and so many don't have what is real. But, I would suggest that taking pot shots at the Presidents unqualified statement of faith without being in his presence is just grandstanding. Ronald Reagan (who personally liked) shrugged his shoulders like Nicodemus at the term "Born Again". But nobody is questioning his placard that says he was a Christian. Why because the religious right like him... Jimmy Carter said I'm "Born Again" in his Playboy interview and teaches Sunday School every Sunday but can't understand why Evangelicals consider Mormons to be heretics....but no one questions his salvation. You get my point, whether Obama is a Muslim or not doesn't really seem to be a concern for winning him to Christ, but defeating him in the public arena of opinion.

Obama is a very public leader and as a leader people follow him. When he proclaims I'm a Christian then says things like this :

"So, I have a deep faith," Obama continues. "I'm rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people. "

( Obama flashback: There is no heaven or hell, all ways lead to the same path )

people will follow him as a leader and adopt that same line of thinking. If we as true Christians don't say "Hey wait a minute!! That's not True!!" then how can we say we're concerned about winning people for Christ? If a leader is professing to be Christian ie having a personal relationship with Jesus the Christ and does not bear the fruits in his life that entails then we need to be vigilant to let people know that what that leader is doing is not an example of Christ. And I say that concerning all leaders. The men you mentioned may be good men, Obama may be a good man, but does not give them passes to mock God.

^{Ephesians 6:12} For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

The origin of this quote? If this is accurate that is where Graham should have sunk his teeth in...by clarifying the error of what defines a true Child of God....The question "..are you a Christian?" Is one I never ask....always ask a person to clarify for me what it takes to become a child of God?

[OneLight]

The term Christian use to mean Christ-like. Today, it means just about anything that can be linked to a church. Sadly, the meaning today is so broad that it can mean just about anything.

[PeterH]

"Hey wait a minute!! That's not True!!" then how can we say we're concerned about winning people for Christ?

This is the problem with us Christians today. Well, I will say how we express the Gospel. What does it mean to win someone FOR Christ? How is that done? I may be splitting hairs, you may have a different meaning in mind, but from this viewpoint we horrible express the gospel. The gospel that we preach now-a-days is weak. We preach the Heaven and Hell gospel, the only reason why Christ is mentioned is so they understand He gets us out of Hell. Paul states: I preach CHRIST AND HIM crucified. The gospel is about a Person not a place. So it doesn't matter who says all roads lead to the same place (Heaven). We point people to a Person.

Ruck1b, that is a very dangerously slippery slope. Yes the gospel is about a person, Jesus.

^{John 14:6} Jesus told him,