The Charge of Inconsistent Separation: The Matter of Mohler

I don’t get the ongoing obsession some fundamentalist still have with Billy Graham.

Thanks Greg, excellent article.

About Billy Graham. But my husband would not be a Christian today if it were not for the influence of a very good friend who was saved after a Billy Graham crusade.

[Teri Ploski]

About Billy Graham. But my husband would not be a Christian today if it were not for the influence of a very good friend who was saved after a Billy Graham crusade.

My ordination council in 1998 asked me whether I would remain about separated from Billy Graham. At that time, Billy Graham was about 80 and not as involved in the evangelical world as he was in previous decades. I felt it was an obsolete question. They should have asked about my principles of separation, instead they obsessed over someone who is passing off the scene.

Chip,

Seriously?

I think it’s fair to remember that through the ministry of Billy Graham - warts and all - some were saved and are now disciples of Christ. If God can bring good out of Assyria and Babylon’s conquests of OT Israel, then God can certainly bless the ministry of Graham.

I agree with Jonathan Charles - the man is 95 now and has Parkinsons. Do we really need to remember every bad thing he did every single time his name gets mentioned? Or have Fundamentalists just completely forgotten how to move on or forgive?

Chip,

I do not understand what you are trying to say. Please explain. Thanks.

Billy Graham is recognized a watershed, even in circles that aren’t “ours.” See here, here and here, for example. Linking with those who deny the gospel (such as Roman Catholics) to proclaim the gospel in an organized effort is the issue. And though Graham himself may be for all intents passed off the scene, we will still encounter those who implement the same kind of methodological approach- whether we are talking evangelistic crusades, mega-conferences, music festivals, or more along the lines of your rural town’s ministerial council. As defensive as some want to get about people who were converted because they heard the gospel through Billy Graham’s ministry (and I have no doubt that there are many who can say that- I’ve met several over the years)- there are also many people who because of his choices have been reinforced in the heresies of Rome and taught to rely on keeping sacraments or other means to guarantee their eternal standing. There have been people who have been led to believe, through Graham, that Jesus as the only way may not be as certain as it is sometimes presented. That is a major problem.

Just wow. Now I really DO understand why some of my non-Christian family members have such an incredibly negative view of Christians. “They will know we are Christians by our love” … indeed.

God COULD have used whomever he wanted to, but he chose to use Erik, who in turn led my husband to Him, and you dare to criticize that? I’m speechless.

Terri,

In your immediate case, if this man (Erik) were to divorce his wife and immediately take up with another woman, would it be loving to refrain from condemnation and correction just because he was instrumental in leading your husband to Christ? I expect not.

The hard facts are that Graham, for all the good that his efforts may have accomplished and that God may indeed have used as His truth was proclaimed, Graham has also done a lot of damage to that truth in his words and actions. It is God’s truth that must be upheld, not those who happened to be used to deliver it.

I agree with you, totally, however the way that Mr. Van Emmerik phrased it was just unbelievable ungracious.

I do not doubt that there are many who have been led astray by Dr. Graham’s teaching, just has there have been MANY who have become Bible-believing, committed Christians. Dare I say that the exact same thing can be said in fundamental churches? I was simply pointing out that you cannot broad-brush condemn all of a man’s work without acknowledging that God can use even those who are imperfect.

When Dr. Graham gets to heaven, I’m sure he will have to answer for the errors he has made, just as all of you who are pastors will have to answer for your errors, and I will have to answer for mine.

I could go on with example after example after example - three in my own immediate family - of unbelievers who will likely remain that way short of a miracle of God, precisely because of the attitudes expressed by many on this board, however, I will not. What’s the point?

[Teri Ploski]

…unbelievers who will likely remain that way short of a miracle of God…

I’m glad God changes lives, in spite of the obstacles so many of us Christians erect. But we do need to be careful not to appeal to love in such a way where bad ideas and practice cannot be identified, for fear of being seen as hateful or mean. The NT makes clear that there are times that error must be confronted, and not even Peter the apostle was above such scrutiny.

[Teri Ploski]

Just wow. Now I really DO understand why some of my non-Christian family members have such an incredibly negative view of Christians. “They will know we are Christians by our love” … indeed.

God COULD have used whomever he wanted to, but he chose to use Erik, who in turn led my husband to Him, and you dare to criticize that? I’m speechless.

Let me apologize for taking an ungracious and unnecessarily abrasive approach. I am sorry, and I hope you will forgive me. I was responding to this specifically…

my husband would not be a Christian today if…

I could, and should, have done this more charitably and gracefully. My point was that if your husband is saved today, it is because of God, not any man. He would have still been saved without Billy Graham, and the fact that Graham was involved in the process does not in any way make his traitorous actions against the Gospel in (many) other instances any less despicable. (See Greg Linscott’s post just above this one)

Wish I would have said that in the first place.

No further message.

Thanks, Chip. Appreciated that most recent post.