What do you think of Billy Graham, and WHY?

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by Johnv:
I have respect for any man who uses Christ to unify people, rather than separating them. Billy Graham is respected with open arms by just about every mainling Christian denomination on the face of the earth. As for his alliance with Catholics, great. Instead of making Christians out of members of the Catholic Church, he's filling the Catholic Church with Christians. Sound good to me!!!

If this is compromising, would that all of our churches be compromised in such a fashion!!!

But what aout doctrine ? Is it worth a big following if you have to ignore the Bible to do it ? What about muslims ?

Billy Graham's words are in quotes...

"You have Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims," he said. "I'll talk about racial understanding and racial harmony between ethnic groups and religious groups because I love all of them, and I know God loves them all."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/1614919

God does not tell us to enjoy "harmony" with non-Christians, quite contrary. Romans 16:17 & 18

Then this...

"I have some difficulty in accepting the indiscriminate baptism of infants without a careful regard as to whether the parents have any intention of fulfilling the promise they make. But I do believe that something happens at the baptism of an infant, particularly if the parents are Christians and teach their children Christian Truths from childhood. We cannot fully understand the miracles of God, but I believe that a miracle can happen in these children so that they are regenerated, that is, made Christian, through infant baptism. If you want to call that baptismal regeneration, that’s all right with me" (Graham, interview with Wilfred Bockelman, associate editor of the Lutheran Standard, American Lutheran Church, Lutheran Standard, October 10, 1961).

And this...

In an interview with McCall’s magazine, January 1978, entitled "I Can’t Play God Any More," Graham said: "I used to believe that pagans in far-off countries were lost—were going to hell—if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. … I believe that there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God—through nature, for instance—and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying ‘yes’ to God."

I say "yikes". "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

But now read this...

In his 1959 San Francisco Crusade, Graham honored the notorious liberal Bishop James A. Pike by having him lead in prayer. Graham had attended Pike's consecration at San Francisco's Grace Cathedral on May 15, 1958 (William Stringfellow and Anthony Towne, The Death and Life of Bishop Pike, p. 306). Pike would also have been involved in Graham's 1957 New York Crusade, as he was the dean of the extremely modernistic Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York from 1952 to 1958. Yet, Pike was a rank, unbelieving Modernist, a drunkard, an adulterer. He denied the Trinity and refused to state the traditional benediction, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen!" He abbreviated this to "In the name of God, Amen!" Three times Pike was brought up on heresy charges in the Episcopal Church. In an article in Look magazine Pike stated that he did not believe the fundamentals of the faith. In a pastoral letter that was to be read in all the Episcopal Churches of his diocese, Pike stated that "religious myth is one of the avenues of faith and has an important place in the communication of the Gospel." He spoke of the "myth of the Garden of Eden." He said, "The virgin birth... is a myth which churchmen should be free to accept or reject." In an article in Christian Century, Dec. 21, 1960, Pike declared that he no longer believed the doctrines stated in the Apostles’ Creed. The same month that article appeared Graham again joined Pike at his Grace Cathedral for a Christian Men’s Assembly sponsored by the National Council of Churches. Three times Pike was picked up by San Francisco police while he was wandering around in a drunken, confused state late at night. He spent four years in intensive psychoanalysis. Pike was twice divorced, thrice married, and had at least three mistresses. One of his mistresses committed suicide; one of his daughters attempted suicide. His eldest son committed suicide in 1966 at age 20 (associated with his homosexuality), and Pike got deeply involved in the occult in an attempt to communicate with the deceased. Three years later Pike died from a 70-foot fall in a remote canyon in the Israeli desert near the Dead Sea. His maggot infested body was found five days later. The 56-year-old theologian had gotten lost in the desert while on an extended honeymoon with his 31-year-old third wife. A biography about Pike noted that "never before in the history of the Episcopal Church had a Solemn Requiem Mass been offered for a bishop in the presence of three surviving wives" (The Death and Life of Bishop Pike, p. 202).

A few reasons why I am concerned about Christians who listen to him, instead of reading & heeding their Bibles.

 

[Ben W]

If your life was subject to constant media attention, Would I be able to find out things about you that I did not like and critisize you for it? Absolutley. Only Jesus Christ is the perfect example. I fully expect that Billy Graham and I may have things that we see differently on. How many of the critics of Billy Graham are getting numbers of people saved?

 

[Ulsterman]

Originally posted by just-want-peace:
To all you people who seem to THRIVE on condemning BG, I offer the following scripture:

" It is against the LORD that you and all your followers have banded together. Who is Aaron that you should grumble against him?"

This is just one verse from Numbers 16 if you are interested enough to read it.

Now I'll be up-front and tell you that nowhere does it say, "Do not criticize Billy Graham"! BUT, the whole scenario should make one at least think just a bit before wholesale condemnation of one of God's chosen!!!!

Well, that's an interesting use of Scripture, but what are you going to do with 2 Chronicles 19:2, if you are interewsted enough to read it?

And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD. (2 Chronicles 19:2).

Sadly, Billy Graham has helped the ungodly and those who hate the Lord. Some of those are already mentioned in this thread. By no means do those mentioned here form a comprehensive listing of the dubious and sinful associationships Billy Graham has had, and for me this is the issue. If the Billy Graham team came into my town I would not support their campaign, because in all likelihood by doing so I would be giving credibility to those who hate the Lord. That bunch of hypocrites would sit on the platform presenting themselves as evangelicals and Bible believers with Billy's help, and then when the circus was out of town they would gladly receive any "converts" and teach them every kind of false hood and filthy thing, including the blasphemy of the mass.

You don't place new chicks under dead hens, and that is what Billy Graham and his Association have being doing for years.

 

[Ben W]

D Moore.

Would you care to explain further your remark about Australia being the place that England sent its criminals to in the past?

I have a fairly good idea of what you are inferring. Would you like me to throw a few remarks towards the country you come from? It would not be particurly hard.

Although I am not keen to put down others from your country who seem like quite genuine people.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by Ben W:
If your life was subject to constant media attention, Would I be able to find out things about you that I did not like and critisize you for it? Absolutley. Only Jesus Christ is the perfect example. I fully expect that Billy Graham and I may have things that we see differently on. How many of the critics of Billy Graham are getting numbers of people saved?

How was Christ glorified by having Bishop Pike open up a service with prayer ? The man denied Christ's deity, and virgin birth. I wouldn't have let him speak at my cat's funeral.

That's why Timothy wrote in his epistle...

"A Bishop then must be blameless..." 1Timothy 3:2

And we see folks saved just about every Sunday, thank you. And I hear great things about the missions we support, lots of folks are being told about Christ.

 

[Ulsterman]

Originally posted by Ben W:
D Moore.

Would you care to explain further your remark about Australia being the place that England sent its criminals to in the past?

I have a fairly good idea of what you are inferring. Would you like me to throw a few remarks towards the country you come from? It would not be particurly hard.

Although I am not keen to put down others from your country who seem like quite genuine people.

Ben W, it was a "tongue in cheek" remark, don't take it too personally. BTW, did you check the reference I gave you?

[ October 17, 2002, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: D Moore ]

 

[Johnv]

But what aout doctrine ? Is it worth a big following if you have to ignore the Bible to do it ? What about muslims ?

It's never unbiblical to light the spark that is the Holy Spirit.

I've long since come to the conclusion that God's plan for people doesn't always happen overnight. The Hebrews were in bondage for hundreds of years. Even after that, they wandered in the desert for 40 years. etc etc etc.

The first thing we do is get Jesus into the hearts of people. Whether that person's a Muslim or Hindu, etc, should be of no account. Think of it. That person goes back into their old faith, but this time with a spark. Eventually, that spark will lead to a small change in a bit of doctrine, then another, then another. Eventually, maybe not for another 400 years of doctrinal bondage, it will change. But we need to let that part be up to God's timing, not ours.

 

[M Wickens]

How is that even after numerous examples of BG's disgraceful theology have been given he is still defended? He believes what makes him popular, not what is truth. I'll not throw back at you what has already been posted, the quotes are there, the truth is plain, BG has perveted the Gospel for hundreds of thousands. From his own words and writings this is apparent.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by Johnv:
But what aout doctrine ? Is it worth a big following if you have to ignore the Bible to do it ? What about muslims ?

It's never unbiblical to light the spark that is the Holy Spirit.

I've long since come to the conclusion that God's plan for people doesn't always happen overnight. The Hebrews were in bondage for hundreds of years. Even after that, they wandered in the desert for 40 years. etc etc etc.

The first thing we do is get Jesus into the hearts of people. Whether that person's a Muslim or Hindu, etc, should be of no account. Think of it. That person goes back into their old faith, but this time with a spark. Eventually, that spark will lead to a small change in a bit of doctrine, then another, then another. Eventually, maybe not for another 400 years of doctrinal bondage, it will change. But we need to let that part be up to God's timing, not ours.

So in other words, there's no hurry to get people saved, because God is patient, and will wait for non-believers to repent on their own time ?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Since Dr Graham definately sarted his ministry rightly dividing God's word, and slowly gave way to the ecumenical approach, the non-offensive doctrine, due to worldly pressures, which we all face, and are hard to ignore, a couple verses come to mind....

"Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you, a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump."Galatians 5:7-9

"Strangers have devoured his strength, and he knoweth it not: yea, gray hairs are here and there upon him, yet he knoweth not." Hosea 7:9

Compromise has taken it's toll on his ministry. Sad, but true.

 

[Johnv]

So in other words, there's no hurry to get people saved, because God is patient, and will wait for non-believers to repent on their own time ?

I've found numerous biblical reference saying that God is love. I've also found several references saying that love is patient.

It's not that God will wait for non-believer to repent in their time, but He will wait for non-believers to repent in His time.

 

[Ulsterman]

I have scanned through this thread from beginning to end, and here is my synopsis:

Those who oppose Billy Graham's style of ministry have cited the following reasons;

1. His open fellowship with apostates and infidels.
2. His open fellowship with Roman Catholic hierarchy
3. Commendation of Karl Barth's neo orthodoxy.
4. His belief in theistic evolution.
5. Failure to speak up for persecuted believers whilst the guest of Soviet Russia.
6. Approval of a sacramental-works based gospel.
7. Belief in some form of baptismal regeneration.
8. His doubt over the literal reality of hell.
9. Belief that without faith in gospel truth pagans will be saved.
10. Sending new converts to dead apostate churches.

In all of this, not once has Dr. Graham's person been criticised or attacked. No doubt has been cast upon his moral behaviour or personal integrity.

Those who side with his style of ministry defend the indefensible on two accounts;

1. It is not right to judge others.
2. The end justifies the means (i.e. lots of people have made 'commitments' under his ministry, therefore his ministry is above criticism).

To those two defences of the indefensible I would say this;

Those who say his ministry is above reproach because of the numbers attending and responding to his message, have bought into the secular humanist lie that the end justifies the means. (BTW My dispute is with the means and not the man). This ideology is the cornerstone of humanism, and it is sad to see it applied to this, or indeed any other, theological and practical Christian debate.

Those who have essentially argued that it is wrong to judge, have in this short thread judged those who oppose Dr. Graham's ministry in numerous ways;

Look over the thread and you will see;

1. We have been accused of being unfair
2. Taking quotes out of context (dishonesty)
3. Being arrogant, or
4. Being ignorant
5. Thriving upon the condemnation of others.
6. Not getting enough people saved (This would have condemned Noah). In any case, how do you know this?
7. We have been judged through inference.
8. we have had our motives questioned.
9. Bob Jones has been judged, even though he founded a university which has trained thousands of Christian pastors and missionaries who have in turn led thousands more to Christ.

Ask yourselves who is really being judgmental in this thread? Why is it wrong to judge Dr. Graham's very public, well documented ministry, but it is not wrong to cast this eight fold judgement upon Baptist Board members? Why can't those who defend Billy Graham's style of ministry not stick to the point and defend the issues raised as they are raised? Is it not because they are theologically and practically indefensible?

 

[Molly]

We are to examine everything carefully,esp men who are claiming to preach God's Word. It has to line up with scripture,or it is wrong. If we do not make discerning examinations we will be tossed about by every wind of doctrine.

 

[rlvaughn]

What do you think of Billy Graham, and WHY?

1. Billy Graham, the man? As far as I can tell, he is a morally upright man of integrity.
2. Billy Graham, the theologian? Agree and disagree, as with anyone, though I think some of his theology is way off base - many which are noted in D Moore's post above.
3. Billy Graham, the evangelist? Here I find little in which to agree with Graham, from his use of decoys in the audience to start movement toward the "front," to his theory of salvation which seems little more than belief of the facts concerning Christ.

 

[M Wickens]

1. Billy Graham, the man? As far as I can tell, he is a morally upright man of integrity.
2. Billy Graham, the theologian? Agree and disagree, as with anyone, though I think some of his theology is way off base - many which are noted in D Moore's post above.
3. Billy Graham, the evangelist?

If we cannot trust or believe Billy the theologian or Billy the evangelist surely that would pit us against Billy the man. (I personally think they are all the same person.)

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Again a thread has gone to a third page. So, I am giving the six hour warning. It is now 853am/1153am(Board Time). I will close this thread No Earlier Than 253pm/553pm(Board Time).
By-the-by the Bob Jones in question was Bob Jones, Senior. Most of us are familiar with the son and grandson BJ, Jr. and BJ III. Senior however was a well known Methodist Citywide Evangelist. He was a younger comtemporary and peer of R.A. Torry, Billy Sunday, et al.

[ October 23, 2002, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: The Squire ]

 

[Johnv]

If we cannot trust or believe Billy the theologian or Billy the evangelist surely that would pit us against Billy the man.

Not to me. I don't always agree with the sunday morning message. If I did all the time, then my discernment circuits would need replacing. I think Billy Graham is a great theologian and evangelist and a man. Just because I don't agree with him all the time does not mean I can't learn from his wisdom.

 

[Rippon]

I have scanned through this thread from beginning to end, and here is my synopsis:

Those who oppose Billy Graham's style of ministry have cited the following reasons;

1. His open fellowship with apostates and infidels.
2. His open fellowship with Roman Catholic hierarchy
3. Commendation of Karl Barth's neo orthodoxy.
4. His belief in theistic evolution.
5. Failure to speak up for persecuted believers whilst the guest of Soviet Russia.
6. Approval of a sacramental-works based gospel.
7. Belief in some form of baptismal regeneration.
8. His doubt over the literal reality of hell.
9. Belief that without faith in gospel truth pagans will be saved.
10. Sending new converts to dead apostate churches.

In all of this, not once has Dr. Graham's person been criticised or attacked. No doubt has been cast upon his moral behaviour or personal integrity.

Those who side with his style of ministry defend the indefensible on two accounts;

1. It is not right to judge others.
2. The end justifies the means (i.e. lots of people have made 'commitments' under his ministry, therefore his ministry is above criticism).

To those two defences of the indefensible I would say this;

Those who say his ministry is above reproach because of the numbers attending and responding to his message, have bought into the secular humanist lie that the end justifies the means. (BTW My dispute is with the means and not the man). This ideology is the cornerstone of humanism, and it is sad to see it applied to this, or indeed any other, theological and practical Christian debate.

Those who have essentially argued that it is wrong to judge, have in this short thread judged those who oppose Dr. Graham's ministry in numerous ways;

Look over the thread and you will see;

1. We have been accused of being unfair
2. Taking quotes out of context (dishonesty)
3. Being arrogant, or
4. Being ignorant
5. Thriving upon the condemnation of others.
6. Not getting enough people saved (This would have condemned Noah). In any case, how do you know this?
7. We have been judged through inference.
8. we have had our motives questioned.
9. Bob Jones has been judged, even though he founded a university which has trained thousands of Christian pastors and missionaries who have in turn led thousands more to Christ.

Ask yourselves who is really being judgmental in this thread? Why is it wrong to judge Dr. Graham's very public, well documented ministry, but it is not wrong to cast this eight fold judgement upon Baptist Board members? Why can't those who defend Billy Graham's style of ministry not stick to the point and defend the issues raised as they are raised? Is it not because they are theologically and practically indefensible?

A hearty AMEN to this post of the U-man! A thread now closed is called :"Sally Quinn On Rick Warren". A guy with the handle of gb93433 said that I was spreading gossip and lies about Billy Graham.According to Gb he knows that I am wrong and that I haven't a clue as to what I'm talking about.I am filled with lies and gossip.I fabricate lies.And so on and so-forth per gb93433.

So I thought I would reprise what Ulsterman has said here about Billy Graham.Perhaps gb would like to try to dispute clear realities.

 

[gb93433]

Since Dr Graham definitely stared his ministry rightly dividing God's word, and slowly gave way to the ecumenical approach, the non-offensive doctrine, due to worldly pressures, which we all face, and are hard to ignore, a couple verses come to mind....

Compromise has taken it's toll on his ministry. Sad, but true.

While young people seem to have all the answers, old people know what really matters. If I remember right Spurgeon mentioned toward the end of his life that he boiled it down to Jesus still loves me. I find that I do not always even agree with myself. As I get older I realize there are some things I once thought mattered so much and now realize they matter very little. They matter so little that they are not even worth a discussion. What I focus on is their obedience in making disciples and less and less on what people say but rather what they do.

It is quite possible that Graham separated himself from the fundamentalists of the time because he found them to be dishonest and actually fabricating lies. He mentions in his book that they were fabricating lies and their ministry fruitless. He also mentions in his book that if their ministry were of God that they would be thriving. What I am actually finding is that those who possess such abilities to lie also lie in other areas of their own personal lives and to others. I was in business long enough to watch those types lie and cheat people in business. When my brother in law was a non-Christian and an active police officer at times he pulled one of them over for a law violation and the stories he told me were amazing fabrications and lies that even the most easily fooled would find hard to believe. They would easily compare to Robert Tilton. There are still things I read about Graham that I find to be lies and information which is quoted from a second hand source that is most likely quoted from another source and passed around until not a shred of it is true or most of it contains lies with little truth.

As I get older and looking back at how many were in Bible studies I led who when they were ready to graduate struggled with the idea of remaining in a poor denomination in an effort to change it versus changing denominations. Despite the fact that I told them that I did not stay in a poor denomination they still had to make their decision. Some chose to stay are leading Bible studies today while others have moved on. My mother received Christ a few years ago and still attends the local RCC she cannot understand why I left. When I look at the Bible studies she is in it is far superior to what I have seen in most Baptist churches. She has a lot of trouble with the past and what she sees now. I know part of the reason she will not leave is not so much of what she has been told but what she has also seen in her 77 years of living. She has heard and seen Baptists who attempted to belittle and condemn those in the RCC. She even tells me there is quite a number of things she not agree with but at the same time she has never felt welcomed in a protestant church. She will go with me but not by herself. Personally I do not like it when someone condemns another's faith even if they are right. I see that it does no good. Most people will not listen to a harsh critic. It is far better to let the person see for themselves by studying the truth and not by drawing attention to what is wrong. We are to draw attention to Christ not everything which is wrong.

While I do not agree with all of Grahams theology I do find him to be a tremendous example of godliness. I see few of his former critics who would hold a candle to him iun terms of their integrity and accountability. The proof is found in who is living for Jesus Christ because of our life.

 

[swaimj]

TBN re-runs broadcasts of Billy Graham crusades on Saturday nights and I have watched them on several occasions. The man is a powerful speaker and he presents the gospel clearly, at least in the old ones from the 50s and 60s. However, the equovications Graham has made and the wrong associations he has engaged in are incontrovertible. God will be the one who gives the final evaluation of Graham's ministry. For me, there are too many troubling statements for me to support him.