Social Network Links
Powered by Squarespace
Search the Riddleblog
"Amillennialism 101" -- Audio and On-Line Resources
« What I Did on My Summer Vacation | Main | Greetings from the Eastern Sierras! »

Who Said That?

"I'm for morality, but morality goes beyond sex to human freedom and social justice. . . Evangelists cannot be closely identified with any particular party or person. We have to stand in the middle in order to preach to all people, right and left. I haven't been faithful to my own advice in the past.  I will be in the future."

You know the drill!  Leave your guess in the comments section below.  Please, no google searches!

Also, you can check out past "Who Said That?" posts by clicking on the "Who Said That?" at the bottom of the post.

Reader Comments (37)

Rick Warren or Billy Graham
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterRichard
Billy Graham
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMatt D
My first thoughts were Richard's two, but on reflecting, I don't think Warren's quite in the position to say, "I haven't been faithful to my own advice in the past." I could be wrong, but I'm going for Billy Graham.
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterPhilip Walker
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered Commenter"lee n. field"
This sounds like Billy Graham to me.
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterKen Rapoza
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterjon
McClearn or Camplo
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterKyleinWI
Jim Wallis
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterPaul C. Quillman
Has to be Rick Warren- He is for deeds not creeds (morality is more important than doctrine) and he thinks a political agenda is more important than getting theology right. Unfortunately, he has a lot of people listening to him.
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJohn Yeazel
Jim Wallis
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterStephen Ley
Billy Graham doing his level best to articulate a two-kingdom theology. Poor Billy.

(I'm certainly no Warren fan, but it's always ironic how those who rightly criticize poor Rick for his "Deeds not creeds" are also usually values-voters of the rightist variety themselves. Political moralism is the final frontier for good W2K to conquer.)
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterZrim
Ted Haggerty in his "apology"?
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterCoyle
Billy Graham
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterdsanger
Billy Graham or that dude with the Crystal Cathedral. :-)
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMike Ratliff
Sorry Zrim, I am not a values voter- I am almost apolitical but realize that we have a responsibility to try to get the most qualified and talented political types to office. As Luther said, I would rather have an intelligent Turk rule over us than a stupid Christian. Perhaps I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJohn Yeazel
Robert Schullar or Rick Warren.

John, I agree with you. I don't understand where Zrim comming from. He sounds confussed.
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterTiminator
I like what Paul Washer says about politics, "it doesn't matter if your the right wing or the left, it's the same bird..." don't stand in the middle get off the bird and stand for Christ.

I'm voting for Kim Riddlebarger for Pres.

but i have no clue as to who said the above quote...
August 18, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterjason
(John and Timinator,

I was making a generalization which, despite what certain forms of political correctness might say, is not always a bad thing. What I meant was that I generally find that those of us conservative religionists who would rightly criticize “deed over creed” Warrenism are also, by and large, those who view and approach their political involvement from a more moralistic posture. The upshot is folks who at once decry Warren and whose activist voting, for example, is mainly steered by something to do with making sure Adam and Steve remain permanently single, etc. This, I think, is just a form of moralism in political dress.

As uncommitted ideologically as I am, I’d like to describe myself as apolitical as well, but that seems disingenuous since we are all political. I’d rather say that I try to avoid a moralized politics and a politicized religion. I’m not always so sure my fellow conservative religionists are on the same page though.)
August 19, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterZrim

Well, I am not so sure it is such a bad thing to make sure that Adam and Steve remain single- many homosexuals are extremely aggressive, loud mouthed, are changing the political landscape and need to be shut up (I think John Calvin would agree with me). To make this the single most important issue and to vote for someone based on this solely would be wrong. Homosexuality is a sin which has serious ramifications though for the most important biblical institution- the family. When homosexual rights get legalized and we allow them to get married we are going against the biblical mandate of protecting and preserving the family unit. It has vast theological and political implications. I do not think that is a good example of your point about voting based on morality or "values." All sins can be forgiven but they need to be confessed as sin and then at least struggled against. We may have to struggle against particular sins the rest of our lives without much "victory" but to blatantly parade sin around with gay pride is very odd, unbiblical and needs to be spoken against. You will not win a popularity contest but at least you are making efforts to remain faithful to the scriptures. You had better think through that issue more carefully and as John Gerstner used to say "with a second glance."
August 19, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJohn Yeazel
I forgot to make my point about being apolitical. You are really trying to pick a fight Zrim and I never back down from a fight. In the spirit of B.B. Warfield I love to go to battle. It may be "disingenuous" but I used to watch and follow politics very closely. You get disgusted with the bureaucrat types who get attracted to politics for all the wrong reasons- they are not doing it with a vocation mentality they are doing it to shove a political agenda down our throats. It gets very difficult to fight this entrenched mentality. They have almost a gangster like protection of their turf and ideas. It is a most difficult nut to crack and they use Christians in order to get votes. That is why I have become almost apolitical. If Christians are to get involved in politics they had better know what they are getting themselves into and have a good backing behind them. I choose to work on my theology and then try to support those who look upon politics as a public service under God and who understands true biblical statesmanship.
August 19, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJohn Yeazel

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.