# Billy Graham



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 4, 2006)

Wasn't sure where to put this, so I'll just try in here.

I was wondering if some of you could help me find some especially heretical quotes from Billy Graham? And I need when/where he said it.

My reason for this is lately I keep hearing "Christians" singing his praises and they don't realize the damage he has done. (I know that is not all he has done)


----------



## jaybird0827 (Jul 4, 2006)

Susita,

Listen to this - 

http://www.apuritansmind.com/podcast/WBNP8.mp3

Also, Billy Graham wrote a book titled, "How to Be Born Again". Evaluate in light of John 3, etc.

Cheers -- _J. Sulzmann_


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jul 4, 2006)

Here is one thread to consider. And here is another.

Here is another famous example:



> On Nov. 21, 1967, an honorary degree was conferred on Graham by the Catholic priests who run Belmont Abbey College, North Carolina, during an Institute for Ecumenical Dialogue. The Gastonia Gazette reported:
> 
> "œAfter receiving the honorary degree of doctor of humane letters (D.H.L.) from the Abbey, Graham noted the significance of the occasion--´a time when Protestants and Catholics could meet together and greet each other as brothers, whereas 10 years ago they could not,´ he said.
> 
> ...



Recommended reading: Erroll Hulse, _Billy Graham -- The Pastor's Dilemma_

[Edited on 7-4-2006 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## jaybird0827 (Jul 4, 2006)

Mrs. Sulzmann and I have just reviewed these links. Thank you Andrew!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jul 4, 2006)

> _Originally posted by jaybird0827_
> Mrs. Sulzmann and I have just reviewed these links. Thank you Andrew!



You're welcome!


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 5, 2006)

> KING: How about abortion?
> 
> GRAHAM: Same thing.
> 
> ...


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 5, 2006)

The thread in question is on the Hannity site and I was kinda shocked to see "Christians" singing his praises.

[Edited on 7-6-2006 by ~~Susita~~]


----------



## ServantofGod (Jul 6, 2006)

And we have to sit here and attack anybody that is most vulnerable...


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Jul 6, 2006)

Oh you used that board the one with all the mormons


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 6, 2006)

hahaha, very funny Nate.  Glad to see you're no longer on that board


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Jul 6, 2006)

Even if I totally disagree with his approach (and many other things), he is still a Christian and God used him to lead many to Christ. With that said, out of curiosity I would like to see some of the things he has said.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Jul 6, 2006)

Hey Im still on that board like I was before just for fun - this board is way better for true christian discussion.


----------



## Theoretical (Jul 6, 2006)

Graham is definitely one of the more distressing and sad cases of Evangelicalism in the contemporary sense. The Interfaith/Ecumenical stuff he's pioneered has definitely spread around quite a bit. This has (obviously) been the case with the standard denominations, but its presence among certain evangelicals (who are really just neo-liberals theologically, I'm growing to understand) is unnerving, to say the least. 

Indeed, it is hard not to see how pervasively (especially here in the Bible Belt) the pragmatic, altar-call based approach has spread throughout the churches and ministries in this area. Just in my own Christian ministries here on campus, the leadership has held evangelistic endeavors that have very questionable approaches, particularly in the long-term (I speak of having "salvation" cards with the standard Romans Road and Sinner's Prayer, etc...). Worst of all is how crippling it can be to one surrounded by this general mentality. The most successful evangelism (and indeed discipleship thereafter) is by nature deeply personal and highly individual in approach. 

With my own current evangelistic/discipleship with my friend Elizabeth (mentioned on an early thread in the evangelism section and what has been my strongest discipleship so far), it's definitely going to be a slow process to help warm her soul more to the Scriptures and deep Christian life in the Church. For one, she's definitely smart enough to see through the "used-car evangelism" like what I described, and besides, even if she did believe more thoroughly after that point, she would have hardly been given any resources for discipleship. God's graciously been using me (lousy though I am at it) to open her eyes more, but I still have to say I struggle with the clear and easy "Say this little prayer" and just do "XYZ" things and then "Boom, Here's a Christian" approaches absorbed from those around me. But that's my little rant for the day.


----------



## JasonGoodwin (Jul 9, 2006)

At least we have a younger generation coming around and seeing through that Old Man's smokescreens. (Sorry, it's hard not to hold Billy Graham "Crackers" in contempt of the Gospel for his pattern of compromise.)


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 10, 2006)

Can you guys come up with anything of his involvement in the emergent church movement?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 10, 2006)

Okay, I have to wonder if he is a Christian or not. I heard he was "good" back in the day...BUT...

His view of "there are many ways to God" (ie Allah, the mormons, etc).

His telephone "altar calls". I had an uncle that call this year...several times. Each time he stated a different church, when they asked his background...each time they went and got a counselor of that church/faith...this included mormonism, I believe. If you are methodist, they get a methodist preacher, etc. This is not doctrinally consistant amoung other problems.


Ian, what did you mean by picking on the weakest? The man has had an influence like you wouldn't believe... If you mean weak in health, that still doesn't excuse him from denial of Christ alone.


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 10, 2006)

Thank-you, Mrs. W. And I think Ian was referring to the Arminian believers.


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Jul 10, 2006)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_His view of "there are many ways to God" (ie Allah, the mormons, etc).


Wow, I didn't know that. I guess he's just as good as Oprah then...


----------



## turmeric (Jul 10, 2006)

This is truly, truly pitiful!


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Jul 11, 2006)

Well I looked on google for about 5 minutes then I got bored.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 11, 2006)

> _Originally posted by caleb_woodrow_
> Well I looked on google for about 5 minutes then I got bored.



Click on the threads that Andrew linked at the beginning of the thread.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 11, 2006)

> _Originally posted by JasonGoodwin_
> At least we have a younger generation coming around and seeing through that Old Man's smokescreens. (Sorry, it's hard not to hold Billy Graham "Crackers" in contempt of the Gospel for his pattern of compromise.)



I would say that some people are slowly awakening to it, but it's still a small minority. Unfortunately, the SBC continues to heap praise upon him as well and there is a great reluctance among evangelicals to publicly criticise him or his ministry for fear of being thought of as a fundy.

[Edited on 7-11-2006 by Pilgrim]


----------



## ~~Susita~~ (Jul 11, 2006)

Yeah I've been accused of being a fundamentalist. I'm not going to even bother replying to that. *rolls eyes*


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Jul 12, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Pilgrim_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by caleb_woodrow_
> ...


You have to bear with me as I am a little slow.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Jul 12, 2006)

> _Originally posted by ~~Susita~~_
> Yeah I've been accused of being a fundamentalist. I'm not going to even bother replying to that. *rolls eyes*



I can only guess where!!!!


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 12, 2006)

So what's the problem with Billy Graham? I bet he's done more than many of us have, certainly than I have.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 12, 2006)

Am I the resident thread killer here or something?


----------



## turmeric (Jul 12, 2006)

Let's see. If he's encouraging his organization to send a potential convert from a Mormon background to a Mormon elder to be discipled that convert will learn that he can become a god and populate a planet if he's good enough. Last time I checked that wasn't the Gospel.

Next question; _Did_ Billy really do this? Because _if he did this_ he advocated heresy when he did. If the organization did this on their own authority, _they_ advocated heresy. If neither did it, well, you asked a good question.

[Edited on 7-12-2006 by turmeric]


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 12, 2006)

Thanks.

Well, if he did that we have to consider that he's getting old and losing some of his "faculties". Or we have to consider that he's just in error. But if he told people that Jesus Christ died for their sins, then that is the Gospel. Remember that we're saved by faith, not by possessing 100% correct doctrine and never being in error. I'm not criticizing you...it took me a long time to learn this.


----------



## ServantofGod (Jul 14, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> Am I the resident thread killer here or something?



You are a man after my own heart dude!!


----------



## gwine (Jul 14, 2006)

> _Originally posted by ServantofGod_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> ...



Actually I've had my share of threads that died after I added a comment. Just you watch this one and see.


----------



## jaybird0827 (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ServantofGod_
> ...





I see I'm in good company. I'm looking for a lead balloon icon to include in my posts. I searched Google in vain. 

_JJS_


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ServantofGod_
> ...



Not dead yet.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 15, 2006)

> But if he told people that Jesus Christ died for their sins, then that is the Gospel.



The Mormons, Jehovahs Witness and Boston Church of Christ say this as well. Is that the Gospel?


----------



## gwine (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > But if he told people that Jesus Christ died for their sins, then that is the Gospel.
> ...



Rom 10:8 But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 

Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 

Rom 10:10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> ...



Gerry,
I am aware of those passages; what are you trying to get across to me by posting them?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 15, 2006)

Let's add that he has 'homosexual Christians' working in his crusades, etc (this was documented in a book on homosexuals in Christianity, book review done for the Charleston Post and Courier, my aunt did the review).


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Let's add that he has 'homosexual Christians' working in his crusades, etc (this was documented in a book on homosexuals in Christianity, book review done for the Charleston Post and Courier, my aunt did the review).



Colleen,
Are they actually _practicing_ homosexuals or repentant ones? Could you support this? I for one would like to see that.


----------



## gwine (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



Um, that "But if he told people that Jesus Christ died for their sins, then that is the Gospel" is not the Gospel? I wasn't even really trying to be argumentive - just quoting Scripture. Forgive me if I came across wrong - I haven't the foggiest idea what you're trying to say.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 15, 2006)

Gerry,
No offense taken brother. 

What I am trying to say is that a gospel message tainted with heresy is not THE gospel message at all. As I mentioned earlier, the JW's, Mormons and Boston C of C all say that in their gospel [sic] messages; are they correct?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 15, 2006)

Add to the above the Roman Catholics........


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> ...



My understanding is that, yes, they are practicing homosexuals. I found the review 3 years ago on the P&C website by searching their archives for family. That was the article that led me to my aunt and she herself is a practicing lesbian. A few months later I tried to continue searching the archives and they had shut it down. I do not know if it is back up or not. I'll try to see if I can locate the review.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 15, 2006)

Okay, they do have their archives back. But they have apparently "cleaned it out" of anything going back more than a couple of years. It was 2003 that I read it...it's not on the site anymore. (and the horrors that show up when you google 'homosexuals, christianity, flynt'...yikes)


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by ServantofGod_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> ...



LOL thanks brother.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

What difference is there between practising homosexuals and say, practising gossips, gluttons or alcoholics? One can't be a practising homosexual and be a Christian but one can be a practising gossip, glutton or alcoholic (or even all three) and still be a Christian.

[Edited on 7-17-2006 by BaptistCanuk]


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > But if he told people that Jesus Christ died for their sins, then that is the Gospel.
> ...



I'm not aware of the Mormons and JWs teaching this. I'll have to check up on that. But if they do teach this then they would not be a cult. The Gospel is that Jesus Christ died for sinners. :bigsmile:


----------



## Arch2k (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> What difference is there between practising homosexuals and say, practising gossips, gluttons or alcoholics? One can't be a practising homosexual and be a Christian but one can be a practising gossip, glutton or alcoholic (or even all three) and still be a Christian.



If one is openly living in unrepentant sin, there is no reason to consider this person a christian at all.

1Jo 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 
1Jo 1:7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. 
1Jo 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 
1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 
1Jo 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

Who says they are living in "unrepentant" sin though? They could be caught in a cycle of sin and repentance that I'm sure all of us have been in at some time. Again, there are many practising gossips, gluttons and alcoholics out there and they get a free pass but people are quick to judge homosexuals. I was only trying to point that out. So to be consistent, the practising judgemental people, as well as practising gossips, gluttons and alcoholics also aren't Christians. Would you agree?

13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God"”through Jesus Christ our Lord! 
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

[Edited on 7-17-2006 by BaptistCanuk]


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

Also Jeff, on the surface those verses appear contradictory to each other that you posted above. But when we remember the verse that says "If we confess our sins..." it is not contradictory. Therefore one who "practises" sin but confesses it, as Paul did, is indeed a Christian. I know you are probably going to misinterpret me here and that's fine. I know what I mean and it's not what you are probably going to think I mean.


----------



## Arch2k (Jul 17, 2006)

Brian,

Romans 7 verse does not contradict 1 John at all. In Romans 7, Paul is declaring the difficulties of the sinful Christian life (the already, and the not yet). Surely we are a sinful people, and that the more we meditate upon scripture and what Christ has accomplished for us, the more we should recongnize exactly how sinful we truly are. We should be able to declare with Paul "I am the chief of sinners!"

To confuse this type of struggle with that of a habitual unrepentant sin is a category mistake though. While the christian will struggle with temptation, actual sin, and even times of "slipping away", he still has the Spirit of God convicting him of his sin, and causing grief to inhabit his offenses against the God that has bought him.

Sin causes the nonchristian to sin more, to look for other ways to militate against the God that judges him. Sin causes the Christian to recognize his miserable condition, repent of his actions and to trust in the Messiah who alone can earn the perfect righteousness required for acceptance with the Father.

Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 
Rom 7:25 I thank God; through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.


----------



## Arch2k (Jul 17, 2006)

Brian, 

It could be that we agree. But just to be sure, how would you interpret the following section from 1 Corinthians?

1Co 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

Hi Jeff, I hear what you are saying. I meant that the passage from 1John that you posted seems to contradict itself on the surface. It says that if one walks in darkness they are not in the light. Then it says if we say we have no sin the truth is not in us. This seems contradictory until we remember that the end of the passage says that we will be forgiven if we confess our sins.

I understand that a Christian will not want to sin (well, sometimes they do want to) but the fact is (as you agree) that we will until the day we die. That is when Jesus will rescue us from this body of death. Until then we are flesh and sin is always near.

But we are saved through faith in Christ, not through being perfect in this life. I started out in a pentecostal church and they were all about perfection in this life. I just don't see that as a possibility.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Brian,
> 
> It could be that we agree. But just to be sure, how would you interpret the following section from 1 Corinthians?
> ...



I think for the most part, we do agree. 'We are each coming from opposite sides, both sharing truth.

This passage you listed above, it is tough. I accept it as the Word of God, but then it seems to contradict the message of grace. It hints at legalism in my eyes. First we are saved by grace through faith, and now we're either saved by keeping the law or we're kept saved by keeping the law. Pentecostals use this verse to promote their "perfection in this life" theology.


----------



## Arch2k (Jul 17, 2006)

Brian,

Just for clarification, I am in no way suggesting a *works based* justification, but rather the reformed understanding of repentance. I this view, there are two ways to categorize sin; 1) Those that if known about will bring about repentance, grief, and a desire to not commit the sin any longer, OR 2) Those that if known about bring about a pleasure that enjoys it's rebellion against Christ and desires to do it even more, regardless of the consequences. It is the latter view of sin that is so dangerous that it can be damning. Again, as the Westminster Confession of Faith states:



> The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XV
> Of Repentance unto Life
> III. Although repentance *be not to be rested in, as any satisfaction for sin, or any cause of the pardon thereof*,[5] which is the act of God's free grace in Christ;[6] yet it is of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect pardon without it.[7]



Let us all take to heart our own sin and rest in Christ as the only redeemer of it's consequences.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> ...



Brian,
All of the groups above hold to semi-Pelagianism/Arminianism. The Jesus that died for sinners is a Christ that justifies by grace alone, not works.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

Scott, that's what I thought. But the Gospel is still this: that Jesus Christ died for sinners. And that's what Billy Graham preaches...or at least he was when I saw him in Toronto a decade ago.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Brian,
> 
> Just for clarification, I am in no way suggesting a *works based* justification, but rather the reformed understanding of repentance. I this view, there are two ways to categorize sin; 1) Those that if known about will bring about repentance, grief, and a desire to not commit the sin any longer, OR 2) Those that if known about bring about a pleasure that enjoys it's rebellion against Christ and desires to do it even more, regardless of the consequences. It is the latter view of sin that is so dangerous that it can be damning. Again, as the Westminster Confession of Faith states:
> ...



gotcha. agreed.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> Scott, that's what I thought. But the Gospel is still this: that Jesus Christ died for sinners. And that's what Billy Graham preaches...or at least he was when I saw him in Toronto a decade ago.



Again, thats what the JW's, Mormons, Roman Catholics preach; is their presentation _the_ gospel or an illicit gospel, and if it is an illicit gospel, does that not say that at the root of their gospel are lies and heresy? Billy Graham is an out and out Arminian/semi-Pelagian and at the root of his gospel are lies, heresy and error.


----------

