Featured Gonna Upset The Apple Cart

It isn't Graham's fault that churches who agree to follow up don't or do a poor job of discipleship. Graham has never said anything other then the walk down the isle was the first of many steps in the life of the Christian.

 

If a person saved or lost goes to either heaven or hell at the time of death, which I believe he does, I have often wondered of the complete surprise of that person that thought he was saved when he wakes up in hell.

 

I don't believe that because a person 'walked the aisle' that they are necessarily false converts. Many people have acknowledged their salvation in that fashion. The converts in Acts had to make their salvation known somehow, or the others would have never known how many were added to the church. We simply just don't have the info as to how they did know which ones were saved or how it was acknowledged. Perhaps it was kept secret so we can argue about it on BB.

 

I have to disagree. I've been a counselor at a Graham crusade, and at a Luis Palau event. There is exceptional, and I mean exceptional emphasis, on connecting the professed believer to a local church for discipleship. There is exceptional, and I mean exceptional emphasis with the participating churches in those events to undertake discipleship from a biblical perspective. The churches commit to providing that Christian education to the new believer who connects with that church.

Drs. Graham and Palau can't personally follow up with the millions who have come forward in their crusades. Neither can their staffs assure that each and every person actually goes to the church to which they become connected at the crusades. Even the churches can't drag the professed believer into their facility and "make them be discipled." It is up to the professed believer to follow up.

A sincere confessor of Christ will do so. An insincere one will not. They know they haven't followed through with the commitment made at the events. They know they were not truly converted to Christ. Yet they will blame Drs. Graham, Palau, the counselor who answered their questions, the church to which they became connected, the associations that follow up with them in a few weeks to ask how their experience as a new Christian is going, knowing full well the failure, if there is one, is on themselves.

The evangelists, their associations, the churches affiliated with the events all do everything in their power to help the professed new believer walk in the Light. But as John wrote, "men loved the darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil" (John 3:19b, NASB).

 

Billy Graham will refer new converts at his crusades to a variety of local churches including RCC. Its no secret he is quite ecumenical and will take the Joel Osteen approach when confronted with straight forward questions that are hot topics like abortion and homosexuality.

They also better be able to follow up with each and every person professing faith at their crusade! Its the very essence of the great commission. They train upwards of 10,000 counselors for each crusade, more than half supplied by the RCC.

 

I never met a Catholic at a Graham crusade.

 

"Graham's message is for people to return to God and their churches. ... Graham offered special praise for the Catholic Church, saying, 'We're delighted that the Roman Catholic Church now cooperates with us wherever we go ...'" 9/1992 Catholic Sentinel

"Early on in my life, I didn't know much about Catholics. But through the years I have made many friends within the Roman Catholic church. In fact, when we hold a crusade in a city now, nearly all the Roman Catholic churches support it. And when we went to Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn., for the crusade [last year], we saw St. Paul, which is largely Catholic, and Minneapolis, which is largely Lutheran, both supporting the crusade. That wouldn't have happened 25 years ago" - Graham, New Life Magazine, 1997

 

And the fact that he allows Catholics to come into his crusades and hear the word of God negates his ministry how, exactly? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it seems that you have pushed aside Graham's work because he might preach to people who need to hear what he has to say. After all, that is what an evangelist does?

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether or not Catholics are saved. Some are, some aren't. I can say the same thing about the Baptists in my own church.

 

"The Pope is a bridge builder Pope John Paul II has
emerged as the greatest religious leader of the modern
world, and one of the greatest moral and spiritual
leaders of the century" - Graham, Saturday Evening Post, 1980

"John Paul II is the moral leader of the world" - Graham, Religious News Service, 1979

"Anyone who makes a decision at our meetings is seen
later and referred to a local clergyman, Protestant,
Catholic, or Jewish." - Graham, San Francisco News, 1957

"Names of Catholics who had made decisions for Christ
were provided at that meeting by Rick Marshall of the
Graham organization." The Florida Catholic, 9/2/83

"I found that my beliefs are essentially the same as
those of orthodox Catholics we only differ on some
matters of later church tradition. I find that my
beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox
Roman Catholics" - Graham McCall's, Jan. 1978

"This past week I preached in the great Catholic
Cathedral a funeral sermon for a close friend of mine
who was a Catholic, and they had several Bishops and
Archbishops to participate, and as I sat there going
through the funeral Mass that was a very beautiful
thing, and certainly straight and clear in the gospel.
There was a wonderful little priest that would tell me
when to stand and when to kneel and what to do." -Graham, 10/21/97

 

And? So what? Web, you could post this stuff all day long, but what does it show other than Graham keeps himself open to being able to preach the gospel to everyone? He has Muslim friends, too. Does that negate his work?

 

Brother, take off the blinders! He actively REFERS people to the RCC! He works hand in hand with the great whore! His views are not orthodox, he is as ecumenical as they come.

Nobody holding to the whole concept of Gods Word says what he says and does what he does. I'm surprised he didn't have an active relationship with TBN as they are one in the same.

 

Sorry, 'Dog, but I've got Catholic friends who believe the gospel just as I do. By the same token, I know of at least one Baptist church in the Kansas City area I couldn't recommend to anyone even if it was the last church on Earth.

I'm not going to cut myself off from anyone that I might be able to reach with the gospel of Christ, and it seems quite obvious to me Billy Graham is of the same mind. Do you know every church to which Graham's crusade refers people? Do you know the mind, heart and spirit of the pastor/priest? If you do, then you could legitimately condemn his choices, providing the church and leadership doesn't preach the gospel. You can't say you "know" that about any church you haven't been in, not even Catholic churches.

An open mind and an open heart is essential to reaching the world for Christ. I won't apologize for that. Neither will he.

 

I'm not talking about individuals within the RCC, I'm talking about the organization as a whole. If Graham was trying to reach those within the RCC for Christ, that is one thing, but he partners (unequally yoked) with the RCC. His own words condemn him, I don't need to add to it.

I used to be a fan of his growing up, but as I matured in the Lord and His Word I cannot bring myself to support him blindly as I used to. Error is error and needs to be addressed regardless of their status.

 

Questions:

1. Does Graham preach the gospel?
2. Is Graham's preaching effective in reaching people for Christ?
3. Do people who hear Graham's preaching believe, be saved, and serve Christ?
4. Does Graham do all that he does in the name of Christ, giving Him glory and thanks?

The Scriptures give clear guidance as to how Bible-believing Christians are to live their lives. Paul set our purpose before us.

Colossians 3, NASB
17 Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father. ​

Regarding our interactions with the lost, unbelieving world, Jesus states:

Matthew 5
16 "Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven." ​

Some other familiar verses:

Matthew 28
18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always , even to the end of the age." ​

All that we do is to bring glory and honor to God. Regarding the lost of this world, Christians bring glory to God when God uses the believer to further His kingdom through evangelism and discipleship. This is to be the motivation of the Bible-believing Christian’s interaction with the world. Can you honestly say Graham is not doing that, even though he may violate your concept that we must shun Catholics as heretics? God is glorified when we demonstrate Christlikeness to the lost. When Graham undertakes what you believe to be ecumenical ventures within his ministry, he makes sure the venture is one in which God’s kingdom is expanded through pursuing the lost with the gospel, be they practicing immorality, abortion-rights activists, homeless, drug-abusers, criminals -- or even Catholics. And believe it or not, there are believing, "saved" Catholics to take up the slack when the crusade moves on.

 

1. I dont shun catholics. They teach a false gospel, something Graham calls the true Gospel. 2. It only takes one drop of cyanide to poison a full glass.

You are not getting the difference between reaching out to the lost and PARTNERING with them in ministry. No, I do not believe God is glorified when Graham approves of thousand of RCC counselors that point people to the RCC. We are to call sin for what it is. The Bible clearly says to NOT partner with them. Grahams own words prove he is ecumenical, its not what I say. Clearly you have a bias towards him and his ministry for whatever reason, maybe because you were a counselor?

 

I fully "get it." That's what Graham's crusades do when they come into a city. They partner with as many churches in the ministry of discipleship as they possible can.

Fortunately, you said "I do not believe ... " Glad you're not trying to speak for God as so many on this board do. Rather than risk damaging our cordial fellowship, I will let it drop at this point. God bless, 'Dog. Thanks for the discussion. This kind of exchange keeps me sharp. :thumbsup:

 

Some might have misunderstood me about Dr Graham, as I did NOT mean that none are saved thru his methods, or that it is wrong way, just that many there who came forward were still lost afterwards, and that he made the concept of "coming forward to receive jesus" aprt of the Christian landscape!

 

I suggest that there is a different message being delivered when Graham uses heretics as counselors to the lost or newly saved. When one bows, as papists do, to the god of Babylon it is not just a polite gesture. That god is not kind to those who teach the truth of Scriptures. History has shown the animosity is continually growing and hostility toward the truth of Scriptures is well documented. The papists exalt man into God, the saints into the intermediary work of Christ, and place relics as idols of worship.

This is who Graham embraces in cooperation. It is a total mockery to the message he delivers. The associations drown out the message.

In the time of the Lord Jesus Christ, the predominant religious group that clung most closely to, copied, only ones allowed to handle, the Scriptures were the ones in which He DID NOT engage as friends nor use as counselors to those who were saved. Such is the historical picture of the papists.

The group that put the priority on the traditions of men, and venerated the temple to being the sole place of true worship; who placed great penitence burdens upon the common folk even securing the financial precedence over the appropriate sacrifice, were the very ones rejected by Christ as those who loved darkness rather than light. Such is also a historical picture of the papists.

Those that dressed in the robes of office, wrapping great phylacteries about their arms and head, desired the preeminent and powerful positions of authority and regarded the common person as uneducated and ignorant, and spent great energy being noticed and noted, were those who plotted and schemed against Christ because they feared the loss of worldly things. Such is truly the history of the papists.

Are the papists not the same as what Christ pronounced his greatest condemnation?

To what other group is given a greater condemnation in the Scriptures in the time of Christ, and what group follows them in the great tribulation?

And it is this sort that Graham would seek out to associate, support, and bolster his meetings?

There is no greater deceit than that found in an allegiance with the papists; just as in Christ's day it would have been deceitful for Christ to be participant and cooperative with the Scribes and Pharisees.

If there are "saved catholics," Graham should have encouraged them to withdraw from the anti-christ papist assembly and associations and join a decent fundamental Bible believing Baptist Church. Just as any right thinking believer would do in teaching Scriptural principles to new converts.

That this is even an issue of contention on the BB is troubling.

 

Though we can and do have fellowship with saved individuals with the RCC and other churches who do NOT teach the real gospel, as those are sinners saved by grace despite their church bad theology, we cannot endorse and approve say RCC as being a Church teaching the right Gospel!

I commend Billy Graham to extending himself across to other churches, but NOT to the point that he sems to have, by procaliming that all who claim to be Christian churches actually are!

 

I'm late coming onto this thread and haven't read through the replies. Let me just throw the apple cart down the hill for ya. ROFL I'm just going to post an idea on the concept of that little prayer and how the "invitation" is often given, which is typically a song, everyone shuts their eyes, people are encouraged to come forward and accept the truth and live happily ever after. The end.

I wonder what it would be like if it was made REAL?

What if a pastor got the nerve to tell the truth? The REAL truth?

What if he stood up there, everyone actually looking, and said something like the following:

If you want to follow Christ, it's going to be tough. He didn't have a peaceful life. People tormented him. People will torment you. They will turn against you. You will have to try to live and work among people who hate everything you stand for. Your own government will use your money to support things that are opposite to your beliefs. Your family may turn against you, even your own children. Your family may be torn apart. You will be raising your children in ways that contradict society and the government may step in and may even take them away from you.
You may lose your job. Your family. Your home. Your health. You will start caring about things you didn't care about anymore and it will be a mental health mess, a major spiritual battle you will fight for the rest of your life.
Those who followed Christ gave up what they had. ALL of it. They didn't come forward in a service and go home and keep everything. Their lives changed drastically, dramatically, and forever. They were in it to the death. That is what this means.
The reward will come after you die. That is the only promise. You can give up your comforts now and have peace everlasting, or you can have them now and have death everlasting. What is your calling? Are you ready to walk this aisle?

What would happen then? Would there be all these fake conversions, all these doubts, all these people going on just emotion and having no change in their lives a week, a year later? What if it happened like that and people actually cared who walked down the aisle, if people erupted into shouts of victory because the decision was REAL, not something to look away from and hide your eyes from? If the person ran down that aisle ready to give ALL, without shame, without embarrassment, knowing that others, REAL others, were there standing behind him/her for support?

Might find a new hallelujah somewhere in the chorus that followed that one.

If it happened.

But it doesn't.

It's just fluff 'n stuff. Winnie the Pooh invitations with everyone looking away while everyone else falls away and nobody quite seems to get why. Hrm. Curious.