1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What would you have done in 1957?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by John of Japan, Oct 18, 2005.

  1. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,403
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Okay, I'll bite Craigbythesea. You say that "history has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that his decisions were in accord with the will of God." Please prove your point with facts. How has history proven this?

    Personally, I disagree. I believe the following examples of extreme tolerance within evangelicalism to be a direct result of Graham's compromise with liberalism and refusal to denounce it.

    (1) The battles within evangelicalism on the inerrancy of Scripture that began in the 1970's and continue to this day. This has been documented by evangelicals such as Harold Lindsell (Battle for the Bible) and Francis Schaeffer (No Final Conflict).

    (2) The current battle within evangelicalism on the very nature of God. (See The Battle for God, by evangelicals Norm Geisler and H. Wayne House.) Why did the Evangelical Theological Society allow proponents of neo-theism to remain in the society?

    (3) The current battle within evangelicalism concerning the very existence of Hell. Billy Graham started this trend. "Later he (Graham) came to believe that hell's fire may be the burning thirst for God of those who have been eternally banished from His presence" (The New Evangelical Theology, by Millard Erickson, a noted theologian who is a Graham defender, p. 36).

    (4) The current battle within evangelicalism concerning those who believe in universalism.
     
  2. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,403
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm afraid I'm going to have to call you on this, too, Craigbythesea. There are no, repeat NO, Fundamentalist evangelists who have preached "all over the world to crowds that were much larger than most of Billy Graham’s crowds." I know or knew personally or have met ALL the major Fundamentalist international evangelists (John R. Rice and the rest of the Rice family evangliests, the 3 Bob Jones men, Ron Comfort, Fred Brown, Monroe Parker, Jack Van Impe [who abandoned Fundamentalism] and anyone else you care to name from the 1950's on. (Isn't name-dropping fun?)

    You are mistaking the Charismatic movement for Fundamentalism. Not at all the same thing!! :rolleyes:
     
  3. Humblesmith

    Humblesmith Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Baptist
    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.
     
  4. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    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. [​IMG] 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. :confused:

    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.
     
  5. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  6. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    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) ...
     
  7. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    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) ...
     
  8. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    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 ...
     
  9. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
  10. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    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.

     
  11. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    22
    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.

    [​IMG]
     
  12. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    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.

     
  13. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    22
    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!

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    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.
     
  15. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,053
    Likes Received:
    1,698
    Faith:
    Baptist
    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. ;)
     
  16. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,403
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Most perceptive, canadyjd. I doubt if any of the evangelicals on the forum (please prove me wrong, folks) know about Spurgeon's fight against the "Downgrade Movement," and his untimely exit from the Baptist Union. [​IMG]
     
  17. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,403
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good point, El_Guero. My primary question is whether or not we should join Graham in cooperating liberals. Some have taken this as a personal attack on Graham. It is not.

    I with Paul rejoice whenever the Gospel is preached, and I rejoice at the souls saved through Graham's preaching, including my wife's grandmother. (However, I doubt if the Apostle Paul would have sat on the "platform" with those trying to get him in more hot water by preaching the Gospel!)

    It does not follow that since I disagree with Graham's version of cooperative evangelism, I am attacking the man or what God has used him to do.
     
  18. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  19. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know of any fundamentalist who thinks of any charismatics as a fundamentalist.
     
  20. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,403
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No reputable church historian will agree with you here. Check Fundamentalist George Dollar's History of Fundamentalism in America, evangelical Ernest Sandeen's The Roots of Fundamentalism, or anti-Fundamentalist James Barr's Fundamentalism. What you have done is swallow the mass media definition of Fundamentalism, not the scholarly definition.

    Sigh. Everyone knew back in 1957 that Fosdick was a liberal: the Fundamentalists, the evangelicals, the liberals. Fosdick called himself a liberal! Okay, since it upsets you so much, I won't quote those "arrogant, pretentious bigots," those nasty Fundamentalists. (Why is it that some evangelicals save their worst attacks for Bible-believing Fundamentalists? And then they accuse Fundamentalists of attacking people!) How about if I quote from a noted evangelical, would that be okay? Alan P. F. Sell wrote of Fosdick as "the celebrated liberal Baptist preacher" who remarked "that he believed both in the divinity of Christ, and in that of his own mother" (Theology in Turmoil, p. 36). Again, Sell says that Fosdick called himself "a Liberal Evangelical--and not one of the unthinkingly optimistic kind either…. The Unitarians pressed him to shun hypocrisy and come over." (p., 113)


    Sorry, I refuse to play the "My preacher is better than your preacher" game. That is emotionalism, not debate. Plus, I would have an unfair disadvantage, since you are taking up for a man like Fosdick.


    I'll try to say it again. Please listen carefully. I AM NOT ATTACKING GRAHAM'S CHARACTER!! I have written nothing shameful about Graham. I am writing about his position, not the man. Craigbythesea, you are so emotional about this, are you sure you should be on this thread? Maybe you ought to back off. You are not defending Bro. Graham's position coherently. Frankly, if you can't come up with some facts, I'll not reply to you again. I don't want to argue, I want to debate.
     
Loading...