Featured How Do Fellow baptist regard Now Billy Graham?

On Dr. Graham...

I've actually been avoiding this thread because I think Dr. Graham's ministry has at times been a confusing contrast over the years. I do believe he falls into the orb of the neo or new evangelicals that I believe have produced much compromise over the years up until the present day by their clear disdain and refutation of the doctrine of Biblical Separation. I was involved in one of the BGEA sponsored movie evangelism efforts back in the early 70's before I was even certain of my own salvation and it was an "anything goes" type of thing with no Biblical standards of conduct or behavior and a very easy type of "believeism" even in those days. I was actually supposed to be a "counselor"...had NO IDEA what to do except get folks to sign a card and turn it over to the "leaders".
As for Dr. Grahams preaching and his personal standards of conduct and financial accountability...I will, even to this day, say NOTHING bad about them. His preaching was ALWAYS a straight, clear presentation of the simple Gospel of Jesus Christ (and he even preached it out of a KJV:thumbs. His personal conduct and his financial dealings were (and as far as I can tell still are) always above board and beyond reproach unlike many of the other "religious" broadcasters and TV evangelists that were his contemporaries.
That said...I was highly disappointed in his lack of discernment when he came back from his highly publicized visit to the Soviet Union and annouced that he saw no signs of any religious persecution in Russia. I was also disappointed about his acceptance of an honorary Doctorate from Belmont (the Catholic school just south of Charlotte,NC). Further...his embrace of many of the big-name contemporary and country musicians on his crusade platforms as well as the presence of Catholic and Anglican "priests" has done nothing to instill confidence among true Bible Believing Christians. All that said...there will thankfully be many (I think) in heaven who sincerely responded to the strict Gospel message that he consistently preached. Any thing he got wrong will be between himself and his Saviour at the Judgement Seat of Christ.....JUST LIKE the rest of us. The ground will be quite LEVEL there.

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

Billy Graham Backs Jesus People Movement

Christian youth culture has become such a prominent, pervasive fixture on the American scene-witness the multi-million-dollar Christian contemporary music industry-that it may be hard to think of it as even having an origin. Yet, as we saw in last week's newsletter, not only is the idea of a distinct, youthful way of "doing" Christianity now over half a century old, but it owes much to the energies and advocacy of the now-venerable Billy Graham.

Last week we caught a glimpse of Billy in the mid-1940s, with pastel suit and pomaded hair, delivering the gospel in between swing-band instrumentals and girl-trio numbers to crowds of bobby-soxed and zoot-suited teens. We also saw him as one of the central personalities and energetic promoters of the influential Youth for Christ organization.

This week we follow Graham into the late 1960s as, disguised in dark glasses, old clothes, ball cap, and a false beard, he joins with demonstrating youth at City University in New York. And as he sits with his wife, Ruth, at their family home in Montreat, listening intently to a collection of rock albums. And as (again disguised) he mingles and raps with the audience at a 1969 Miami rock concert, to the strains of the Grateful Dead and Santana. And as (undisguised) he takes that same stage, by invitation of the concert promoters, to tell the partying masses how to "get high without hang-ups and hangovers" on Jesus.

During those years marked by youthful unrest, we can also peer discreetly into Graham's home life, where, much to the distress of his famous father, the teenaged Franklin Graham smokes, drinks, and flouts authority. Though Billy has his "human" moments as he confronts this rebellion (he once candidly admitted that his reaction on first seeing a group of demonstrating hippies was a strong desire to "shave them, cut their hair, bathe them, and then preach to them"), yet Graham still responds to Franklin with a compassionate patience that also marks his public interaction with his son's generation.

So, for example, following him into the early 1970s, we find Graham riding in the New Year's Day 1971 Pasadena, California, Tournament of Roses Parade, where he picks up the raised-index-finger gesture and "One Way" chant of the Jesus People and echoes them back to appreciative crowds all along the parade route. And we read Graham, in his 1971 book, The Jesus Generation (Zondervan), rejoicing that the Jesus People movement heralds a new spiritual awakening for America.

Throughout this period, Billy Graham passed lightly over the stylistic eccentricities and excesses of the Jesus People and exulted over their on-fire faith—a reaction relatively rare among Christian conservatives.

At one point, Graham signaled solidarity with that generation by allowing his hair to grow down over his collar. After a TV appearance, the evangelist received a flood of negative letters for his trouble—some even enclosing money to pay for the haircut. Not every Christian was pleased with Billy's new friends and Billy's new attitude.

Graham advocated persistently for the "Jesus Revolution" in his Crusades of the early 1970s (these audiences for these crusades were made up of 60 to 70 percent young people) and threw significant support behind Explo '72, the period's "Christian Woodstock."

 

Falwell and Graham have both been godly men who have garnered great respect and have been giants in the Kingdom of God.

 

We can tell who has a low view of Billy Graham on this site. Our primitive brothers seem to really dislike him. And, if I were a hypercalvinist I guess I would feel the same way.

 

Falwell redeemed himself in his later years. His antics with Larry Flint were embarrassing.

 

Maybe he should have redeemed himself with Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker.

 

That is low my friend and you should repent of the sin of slandering a godly man by putting him in the camp of charlatans.

 

He chose to go in their camp and make a deal. He put himself in their camp.

 

For shame, he listened to "rock" albums and he had a rebellious kid and I bet his wife wore pants to church. I guess your kids were perfect and you are without sin. Maybe you need to work on that beam in your eye brother. Good grief!!

 

When men take on the name Christains and are ordained into the position as leaders there is more expected out of them. To whom much is given, much is required. David, a man after Gods own heart did evil and gave great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blasheme, 11 Sam 12:14 A man should first count the cost before he takes up the armor. The problem that plagues America is excuses for sin among the saved and excuses for breaking the law among the sinners.

 

What he did to the Bakers was dishonest and deceitful, and that's putting it mildly.

 

Quite so. He was blinded by greed and covetousness.

 

OK, I will bite. I don't know the story. What did Farewell do to the Bakers. An accusation should be documented. Hopefully it's not along the same lines as Salzer's attack on Billy Graham.

 

Only if one believes that the Bible is still being written.

 

I don't know if Farewell did anything to the Bakers.:laugh: Of course what Falwell did to the Bakkers not Baker is a different story.

 

This is the bottom line. Those criticizing Billy Graham and probably Jerry Falwell on this board are losers, and will never, ever, come close to promoting the Kingdom of God that these two men did. You no load jerks that sat on your fat butts for years in seminary that never did anything in real life to make a difference, from telling others about Jesus to never defending this nation, IMO, have no right to criticize these two men. All you have ever probably accomplished is making a scale go to 400 pounds.

 

I know your not talking about me because i never went to a seminary, i don't weigh but one hundred and sixty five pounds, i have thirty two years in law enforcement and retired when i was 59 years old. I have preached and pastored since the mid seventies and have never took a dime from the church for my living. I wouldn't trade places with Falwell or Graham either one.

 

Gulp (a huge one at that)!

You hit the proverbial nail square on the head. I don't know if it was driven home and through the hearts it was meant for, but you clearly said what I feel about those who have accomplished great things in the ministry.

Graham and Falwell did amazing things by the name of Jesus, and unless the critical party has accomplished similar things, they have little right to criticize.

Graham brought a multitude of people to Jesus. Sure some may not have stuck with it. Sure some were sent to churches that may have taught doctrine that was not conducive for a newborn let alone a mature believer.

However, in his years of evangelizing, he brought a great number of churches together for reaching the lost, and during his messages, he delivered.

Falwell built up a fantastic Chritian university, and its graduates will be leading and teaching Jesus into the generations yet to be born.

Thanks for having the guts to speak the truth. It may have been harsh, but it was true.

I know I've had some snipers make snide remarks about the books I've written, but those who sniped have yet to write a book.

In the real world we call these folks arm chair quarterbacks! The church seems to have way too many people that are content to sit on the fifty yard line, cheering and jeering and second guessing, but not interested in getting down on the field of play and getting knocked around, knocked down, and having dirt kicked in their face.

Shalom!

 

RD, these are attacks by men who make ridiculous accusations and then fail to back them up with facts. The best they can do is point out a typo. Best thing to do is to ignore them and let this thread die.

 

If anyone thinks that Falwell was not a greedy, covetous slimeball in his dealings with the Bakkers, that person either does not know the facts or has a selective memory.