What would you have done in 1957?

I would not have joined. 20/20 hindsight about the success of Billy Graham aside, then I have to conclude that most of the ecumenical efforts die off. There's no reason to join efforts with a heretic.

Gold Dragon: if you want an example of liberalism, see the works of Harry Emerson Fosdick. Very religious, outwardly Christian, but denies every major tenet of the faith. At the end of his life, after spending 40 to 50 years teaching liberalism, I saw a quote where he was decrying the fact that the liberal teachings had caused the church not only stop growing, but reduce numbers, while the conservatives were growing.

 

Thanks for the kind words John. Mentioning dim sum is making me hungry.

not a problem. I took no offense and it gave me opportunity to clarify.

You probably haven't read my thoughts on Catholicism, evolution and postmodernism or you wouldn't say that. Although I would agree with you, I do not classify myself as liberal. I also do not classify myself as moderate or conservative. Go figure.

Thanks. I agree, that I have not lived in that era and am not familiar with specific liberals of that time. My understanding of liberal is basically how fundamentalists and conservatives use the word, to describe basically everyone who disagrees with them.

Thanks. I'll do some digging into what they actually believed and why. Of these, I am familiar with Bishop Pike because of the last BG thread that we had a while back. In his case, his more controversial positions did not come up until after his association with BG.

I agree. Love and gentle rebuke/confrontation are not incompatible. But Jesus' words in Matthew 7:1-6 should be our guide in these situations.

 

II Cor6:11-18.This speaks of fellowshipping with unbelievers.When one denies the deity of Christ not only are they a liberal by 1957 standards they are a liberal by todays standards.These people I would try to win to Christ but until they accepted Christ as Lord and Savior I would not work with them.

In addition to that ,talking about today,I think all people who wish to call themselves fundamentalists should be required to read "The Fundamentals",edited by R.A. Torrey.That is the group I hope I fall into and it is the group I think John R. Rice was in.

 

John,

You actually pose a juxtaposed set of questions within your question ... If I understand correctly.

Paul said that he was thankful that for whatever reason Christ was preached ...

... but, then you relate Graham's preaching the Gospel to those that teach heresy ... Paul tells us to correct and rebuke (and even to not associate with heretics) ...

 

Yes, I would assist Billy Graham in a crusade.

AND

Yes, I would correct any heretics that I met there as well.

Yes, I would teach the True Gospel and renounce any and all false Gospel(s) ...

 

Where I run into issue with separation is that many on this board do not agree with what I would consider fundamental to the faith.

And I think this is the real crux of your question: HOW MUCH separation from the heretics is required by the Bible?

Unfortunately, Graham made decisions to associate with sinners that I would not have associated with. I consider liberalism to be a sin and even a heresy.

Where to draw the line and RESIST the spreading of the Gospel is the TENSION that I deal with daily.

[I TRULY PREFER KJVO FUNDAMENTAL CLOSED PULPIT BAPTIST CHURCHES ... With Gospel SINGING!!!]

I do not like the 'modern gospel' method ... but, I HAVE TO reach the lost ... and I am afraid that many are not reached because we (those servants of God who are similar to myself) are sometimes too comfortable with 'old time religion' ...

I know that many will attack God's ministry through me, because I will move into the path of the highway to HELL ... but that is where WE (men like me) must engage the enemy! We must hold our positions! We must divert those headed to hell for as long as we can stand the heat ...

 

I just read one of Harry Emerson Fosdick's most famous sermons, "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?” and thought it was an excellent sermon.

History Matters : Shall the Fundamentalists Win?
Religion Online - The Living of These Days: A Tribute to Harry Emerson Fosdick

I'll check out "The Peril of Worshipping Jesus" and "The Hope of the World".

 

I was able to find the following quote from The Hope of the World. But not much else online from the book or anything from the sermon "The Peril of Worshipping Jesus". I'll be on the lookout for this book.

 

John of Japan wrote,

Please don't post fictitious information on this message board. The fundamentalist evangelist of whom I am writing frequently preached to crowds in excess of 500,000 persons.

The Charismatic Movement and fundamentalism are NOT mutually exclusive.

If you have a bone to pick with liberals, charismatics, and other people whom God has ordain to preach the Gospel, that is your business and I believe that you should keep it to yourself rather than attack the people of God on a Christian message board. Billy Graham may not have been absolutely perfect in all that he accomplished, but I can not think of anything that he ever wrote or said that is as shameful as what you have posted about him on this message board.

 

Religion Online : Debating the Incarnation

I found this article written in the same year as the publication of Hick's book that addresses the intent of the book, the understanding of the word "myth" as intended by Hick and the cultural impact on its generation. Quite an interesting take.

 

John of Japan wrote,

Have you read Fosdick’s book, The Man From Nazareth, or have you limited your reading of Fosdick to hate literature written by arrogant, pretentious bigots who take pleasure in tearing down men of God? Fosdick was more liberal in his theolgy than I am, but does that make him any less a man of God? I don’t believe it does.

With whom was God more pleased, Harry Emerson Fosdick or John R. Rice? I don’t know the answer to that question—and neither do you!

 

I found this article written by two of Ferre's children.

Theology Today - The theology of Nels F.S. Ferre: Living toward the age of unimunity

It mentions The Sun and the Umbrella as being controversial to fundamentalists. But no specific quotes from that book or the other one. Also no mention that he denied the deity of Christ or the sinlessness of Christ.

It is an excellent biographical article with lots of insights into his thinking and character. The words universal, inclusive and ecumenical would probably spark thoughts of universalism in the average fundamentalist and it does sound like Ferre was a universalist of some sort.

I'll keep looking for quotes from those two books.

 

John of Japan

I would pray that God would give me the insight of a man like Martyn Lloyd Jones and the courage of a man like Spurgeon to stand on the solid ground of Scripture and not be a party to the downgrading of the gospel.

 

Craigbythesea,
This may come as a surprise to you but it is alright for people to have opinions which differ from yours. In many threads you persecute,beat up,and badmouth everybody who does not share your opinion of any number of subjects or you try to bully them with your vast array of degrees or your incredible library. Then you accuse them of having an unchritian attitude.I love you man and pray for you daily as promised but you need to sweeten up your spirit a little.

My apologies in advance.I do not mean to hurt your feelings but I can't hold back any longer.

 

I don't know of any fundamentalist who thinks of any charismatics as a fundamentalist.