February, 1962 - Graham and the Genesis Record: "In this paradise that God had built, called the Garden of Eden - you can take it symbolically, you can take it literally - it makes no difference as far as the truth and meaning is concerned." But it does, Mr. Graham, it does! It makes all the difference in the world as to whether the Bible is to be taken literally or symbolically. Billy Graham has been cohorting with the myth-minded modernists for so long that he has begun to absorb their way of thinking. Such is the tragic consequence of compromise with unbelief!
***
March, 1962 - Operation Double Standard! "Dr. (Billy) Graham is the front man, the chief spokesman for a growing group of people who believe in yoking up with unbelievers contrary to the Scriptures. They believe that a man may be saved without believing that the Bible is true or without believing in the virgin birth or the deity of Christ. They call people Christians who are really infidels by dictionary definition; that is, not believing the fundamentals of the historic Christian faith. So they believe in cooperating with modernists. They believe in supporting the denominational programs which include modernism. They believe in having modernists to help control and manage revival campaigns. They believe in having modernists lead in prayer in these campaigns and sending >inquirers’ to modernistic churches.. .Dr. Graham is the chief spokesman for those who believe in the >inclusive policy,’ of coexistence of unbelievers and believers, saved and lost, Bible believers and infidels in the same organizations. - (John Rice, Sword of The Lord.)
* * *
April, 1962 - The Archbishop of Canterbury: "Heaven is also not a place to which we humans go in our present bodily state, nor is it a place for Christians only. Those who have led a good life on earth but found themselves unable to believe in God will not be debarred from Heaven. I expect to meet some present-day atheists there." This will be news to the Archbishop, but if he believes the bunk expressed in his statement above, he’ll not be entering heaven; he’ll be joining his atheist friends in a never-ending hell. This is the man who as head of the Anglican Church was pictured with Billy Graham in New Delhi at the World Council of Churches conference. P.S.: Graham’s smiling handshake does not make the theology [of] this ecclesiastical serpent any less poison from the pit of hell!
***
April, 1962 - A United Press Release: Liz Deserves Pity, Not Scorn -- Graham. Evangelist Billy Graham said yesterday actress Elizabeth Taylor was more to be pitied than censured for shedding another husband." Such sentimental pious slush should make us sick on the stomach! Mr. Graham would do well to save his pity for penitents instead of showering it upon professional Hollywood whores.
***
April, 1962 - Billy Graham: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture." What other foundation would you suggest, Mr. Graham?
***
August, 1962 - The Following Statement is from the pen of Hillyer H. Straton, a liberal Baptist minister, in appraisal of evangelist Billy Graham. "Those of us present at the luncheon which introduced Graham to the Boston ministers were especially impressed with his ecumenical spirit... .All of us felt our hearts strangely warmed as he went on, ‘Christ can unite fundamentalists, of which I am one, and so-called modernists about the cross. We’ve got to forget our differences.’ His cooperative attitude is a very significant fact, for Graham has the confidence of fundamentalists. He can be a large factor in bridging the gap between them and ecumenically minded Christians.@ Billy Graham is doing for the modernists what they cannot do for themselves!
***
November, 1962 - The Church Bulletin News published by the Billy Graham Southern California Crusade, with offices at 1101 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles 17, Ca., had the following in their issue of October 15, 1962: "The General Crusade Committee met and unanimously elected Methodist Gerald Kennedy as their chairman." For Communist front record, Bishop Kennedy is not far behind his fellow Methodist Bishop Oxnam. Kennedy has been listed with ten such front activities. With regard to the Second Coming, Kennedy wrote: "With the exception of a few very narrow sects, this has not been a relevant issue in American Christianity for 25 years.... it does not seem to us that the Christian hope is a mere waiting for a return of our Lord.. . .I shudder to contemplate the effect on the intelligent laymen of the American churches of a great world-wide conference of Christians discussing the Christian hope as if it were dependent upon a Second Coming." Graham is going from bad to worse in the pursuit of his policy of compromise! One of the rankest modernist bishops in the Methodist Church has now been appointed chairman of his 1963 Los Angeles campaign.
***
December, 1962 - According to Decision for 1962, Billy Graham appeared on a panel with Harvard professor, Richard Niebuhr. On the question of the virgin birth Niebuhr stated: "You want my personal view. My view is that the virgin birth doesn’t make a bit of difference. I can’t get angry at anybody for holding it, but on the other hand I certainly don’t hold it myself. I’ll be glad to tell you why. As far as I am able to figure out in my own reflections, the virgin birth has nothing to do with the meaning of Jesus Christ as one who suffers and dies and is raised on our behalf. I think this would be the heart of the gospel, or kerugma, as we say today." Graham replied: "DR. Niebuhr and I would disagree at the point of the virgin birth.. .but it is not the heart of the kerugma (preaching). I would agree at this point." A fatal agreement! Instead of denouncing Niebuhr’s denial of the virgin birth, Graham mildly disagrees, and then hastens to agree that it is not "the heart of the kerugma," that is, it is not important, not essential to preaching. Question: If the virgin birth is not essential to Gospel preaching, why believe it? Niebuhr in his unbelief is at least more consistent than Graham!
***
December, 1962 - In his book, The Sun and The Umbrella, Dr. Nels Ferre, arch-blasphemer of blasphemers, says on page 39, "The use of the Bible as the final authority for Christian truth is idolatry." In the same book, page 35, he says:’To call Jesus God is to substitute an idol for the incarnation; to call him Saviour in the ultimate sense, is to deny that all salvation comes from God our Saviour and from Him alone. On the jacket of this blasphemous book, the following endorsement was given by Bishop Gerald Kennedy, chairman of the General Crusade Committee for the 1963 Graham Los Angeles Crusade: "We have stood in need of this clarification of the person of Jesus. If it shocks certain traditionalists, it will thrill sincere, world-minded Christians. Nels Ferre has given us a clue for a truly universal Christianity." Now at this point I could very piously say, "Draw your own conclusion." But that would be wrong counsel, wrong advice. The conclusion is already drawn and given in God’s own Holy Word, II John 7-11. And Bible-believing, Christ-honoring Christians ought to have no part of Graham as long as Graham is in association and cooperation with the likes of infidel Bishop Gerald Kennedy. It is just as simple as 2+2=4.
***
January. 1963 - The Good In All Religions! In his publication, Decision, November 1962, Billy Graham states (from an address before the Harvard Law Forum): "There is good in all religions, but there is a point beyond which they do not go.... I believe it is this that makes the Christian faith distinctive. Christ gives the capacity and the power to live on a totally different plane from that found in other religions though I recognize the good in all of them." So says Billy Graham. Now hear the Holy Spirit inspired apostle: "But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God; and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils." (I Corinthians 10:20) Apparently Paul could not see the good that Billy Graham sees in other religions! Let us beware of the curse of comparative religions!
***
January, 1963 - The San Francisco Examiner, May 7, 1961, reported the following concerning Bishop Gerald Kennedy: "I’m for Bishop Pike about 99% of the time...I don’t think such theological issues as the Virgin Birth of Christ are the central, important things. On many such questions, like Bishop Pike, I say I don’t know." He is admitting to an awful amount of apostasy when her agrees with the blaspheming Bishop Pike 99% of the time. This is the same Bishop Kennedy who has been appointed chairman of the Graham Los Angeles General Crusade for August of this year.
***
July, 1963 - Dr. Billy Graham quoted in the Michigan City News-Dispatch (AP), June 2, 1963, from Bonn, Germany, said: "I admired Pope John tremendously....I felt he brought a new era to the world. It is my hope that the cardinals elect a new Pope who will follow the same line as John. It would be a great tragedy if they chose a man who reacted against John. There were plenty of people who slobbered all over themselves in praise of the Pope at his death, and we are not in the least surprised that Billy Graham should be numbered among them. He has championed the ecumenical movement with its Rome-ward trend for quite some time.
***
September, 1963 -Dr. Charles J. Woodbridge, professor at Fuller Seminary for seven years before resigning because of New Evangelicalism, whose counsel was often sought by Dr. Billy Graham, warned the evangelist in these words: "If you persist in making common cause with those who deny the Word of God, and thus in minimizing the sharp line of distinction between those who are loyal and disloyal to the Scriptures, it is my strong opinion that the verdict of church history will be that you will be known as the greatest divider of the church of Christ in the twentieth century." Dr. Woodbridge is right. It is the compromisers who are causing the division in the Body of Christ, not the Fundamentalists. Billy Graham, through his compromise, has become a symbol. He has become the champion of compromise and confusion.
***
September, 1963 - In an article on separation in the November 1958 issue ofEternity Magazine, evangelist Billy Graham cited II John 10-11 and Romans 16:17-18 as his basis for some strong remarks on separation. He wrote as follows: "Here we have the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ involved. If a man blatantly denied the deity of Christ or that Christ has come in the flesh, we are not even to bid him God speed.. .Thus the Scriptures teach that we are to be separated from those who deny the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.. .No doubt there are some men in the church today who deny the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. If I knew that a man denies His deity, I am not to commend him or to have spiritual fellowship with him, but I am to treat him as an antichrist and an enemy of the cross." (pages 18-19) Well written, Dr. Graham! Now practice what you preach! Open your eyes, Dr. Graham, and take a good look at the General Chairman of your current Los Angeles Campaign, Bishop Gerald Kennedy. In hid book, God’s Good News, p.125, the blaspheming Bishop declares, "I believe the testimony of the New Testament taken as a whole is against the doctrine of the deity of Jesus." It’s your move, Dr. Graham! By his own acknowledgment Billy Graham’s sin of compromise with modernists is condemned by the Word of God. He knows it, yet persists in pursuing his course of compromise contrary to the command of the Holy Scriptures.
* * *
September, 1963 - Dr. E. Stanley Jones was honored on the platform of the recent Billy Graham Los Angeles campaign. In the liberal Christian Century, August 14, 1957, p.970, Dr. Jones presented his appraisal of Graham’s campaigns as follows: "Billy Graham’s Crusade, while having things here and there which may not be wholly acceptable, nevertheless is a very healthy meeting place for conservative and liberal, and in the contact each may gain something from the other and then something beyond each may emerge--the Christian." This statement illustrates the tragic consequence of compromise. It is clear that Dr. Jones’ concept of a "Christian" is entirely contrary to that set forth in the Bible. A Christian, according to Jones, is one who is in the process of becoming; no one can yet say that he has arrived. Compromise always produces confusion, and this confusion is nowhere more evident than in the hybrid liberal-conservative breed produced by Billy Graham’s campaigns.
***
October, 1963 - The St. Paul Dispatch, Sept. 10, 1963, under the caption "Billy Graham Views Movies and Sex," had this significant statement: "Some thirteen years ago, Billy Graham was ripping into movies in his stirring speeches at his many rallies and religious crusades. Today, Hollywood looks upon the evangelist as a friend. Graham has modified his stand on the motion picture since 1950. . .He flatly does not subscribe to the traditional view of blanket condemnation of screen product which espouses too many movies but that he does catch Hollywood’s more outstanding films." On September 21, Graham was pictured at lunch with Barbara Stanwyck just after he had launched MGM’s "The World’s Greatest Showman," legend of Cecil B. DeMille, UPI Telephoto; on September 24, he appeared on the Jack Benny show to assist in the opening of a new season. Question: Who has converted whom? Hollywood hasn’t changed, that’s for sure; but Graham has.
* * *
March, 1964 - A Catholic paper, Operation Understanding, (December 22, 1963), carried the story of Billy Graham’s speech at Belmont, N.C, Abbey College: "I think that the emphasis that the late Pope John brought the Ecumenical Council of the Bishops in Rome itself--a Council that has the prayers of all Christendom--herald the present Christian revolution... The emphasis in our time may be on the Holy Spirit. Everywhere people are gathering---Protestants, Catholics, and yes, Jews--to pray together. I know of 114 such groups on Long Island itself. Is the Holy Spirit in our time doing something that is beyond any of us?" The motivating spirit of ecumenism is not the Holy Spirit, but Satan!
* * *
November, 1964 - Billy Graham, in the October, 1964, issue of Decision (his publication), in an interchange between himself and British television commentator, David Frost, said: "I believe that God did create the universe. I believe he created man. Whether it came by.. .a process and at a certain point he took this being and made him a living soul or not, does not change the fact that God did create man." This is theistic evolution.
***
February, 1965 - - In Pageant Magazine for June 1964, movie star Jane Russell is quoted: "Without apology the stiff-necked, blue-nosed puritan churchgoers can’t understand me, but there are others, those who love God, who don’t fear Him, who can understand my sort of reverent irreverence. I’m a religious person, I believe in doing right. But it would be a hoax to describe me as a stainless creature. I go to church and believe in God, but also, as the saying goes, I smoke, I drink, I chew, and I go with the boys who do." This Hollywood harlot was supposed to have been converted under the ministry of a very well known evangelist back in 1949 who has described her as "a very lovely Christian girl." If you wish to know the name of the evangelist, ask the pastor. Or just take a good guess! Jane Russell is a perfect example of the type of "convert" produced by a compromised evangelism. Compromised evangelism produces a compromised Christianity.
* * *
March, 1965 - The devotional speaker at the offices of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in Minneapolis recently was none other than E. Stanley Jones. Even for an organization specializing in explanations, this one will take some fancy explaining!
* * *
April, 1965 - In a letter dated March 19, 1965, to Mr. Julius Taylor, 100 Cardinal Drive, Taylors, S.C., the Rev. Cuthbert E. Allen of the Roman Catholic Belmont Abbey College wrote as follows: "Billy Graham gave an inspiring and theologically sound address that may have been given by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen or any other Catholic preacher. I have followed Billy Graham’s career and I must emphasize that he has been more Catholic than otherwise,.and I say this not in a partisan manner but as a matter of fact. Knowing the tremendous influence of Billy Graham among Protestants and now the realization and acknowledgment among Catholics of his devout and sincere appeal to the teachings of Christ which he alone teaches, I would state that he could bring Catholics and Protestants together in a healthy ecumenic spirit. I was the first Catholic to invite Billy Graham; I know he will speak at three other Catholic universities next month; I believe he will be invited by more Catholic colleges in the future than Protestant colleges. So I am well pleased, then to answer your question: Billy Graham is preaching a moral and evangelical theology most acceptable to Catholics." Question: Who has converted whom? When Graham’s message receives the endorsement of Roman Catholicism, it is a compromised message. How long will people who know better support such compromise?
* **
May, 1965 - The following quotation was used in the pastor’s message last Sunday evening and is being placed in the bulletin for the use of those who may wish to have it. In his book, Love, the Law of Life, Toyohiko Kagawa, wrote: "Belief in evolution is a faith in a progressive entrance into an ever-expanding freedom. . .from anthropoid agape to human, from ant to Son of God. What a courageous faith! The belief that there is a direct line from amoeba to man is more daring and romantic Faith than the belief in the myth of a Creator making something out of nothing . . .evolution is growth from electron to Divinity." Such a pronouncement is nothing short of blasphemous. Kagawa was the chief evangelist for the United Church of Japan, and was widely used by the National Council of Churches in this country. He was honored on the platform of the Graham evangelistic meetings in Japan a number of years ago.
***
September, 1965 -- Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., president of Bob Jones University issued the following statement in anticipation of a proposed Billy Graham crusade in the city of Greenville, S.C.: "When Dr. Graham gets up and says publicly. ‘I have been cooperating with modernists and Roman Catholics and everybody else; I have been seeking sponsorship and turning converts over to them; I am convicted that it is wrong, and I want to repent of my sin of disobedience; from this day on I am going to work with God’s people, the Bible believers, and nobody else,’ then I will be the first one to say, ‘Praise God, let’s help him.’ But until he makes a public statement of his repentance and declares his new position, I am not going to plead his case. Now is that clear? So when he comes to Greenville, whatever the situation may appear to be and whatever their public relations department and the modernistic preachers of Greenville try to make the setup appear to be, Bob Jones University is not going to cooperate. I want to make it clear what I mean by that so if there are any of you who want to cooperate you can make your plans not to enroll next year. No dormitory student from B.J.U. will be given permission to attend any crusade meeting or have anything to do with it." To this we say a hearty, "Amen!"
***
October, 1965 - Dr. John Rice, referring to Billy Graham in his Sword of the Lord, wrote: "...while he used to attack modernism, and where in his book he said all preachers ought to attack modernism, he has put strings on his message, to avoid offending modernists about Hell. He starts his sermons on Hell by saying, ‘Hell is not a sadistic torture chamber,’ and he assures his audience that some preachers have made Hell so hot with such a vivid imagination that they have made it ‘abhorrent to the love of God.’ That language pleases modernists, of course, very well. But it is not Bible language. And though he preached on Hell, he gave assurance that modernists like Albert Schweitzer would not go there. He said, "Could Adolph Hitler and Albert Schweitzer go to the same place?’ You see, when he runs with modernists, he must make modernists sure that he does not mean them when he preaches about Hell for Christ - - rejecters. He puts strings on his own message.’ At the close of the message last Lord’s Day several people requested the information contained in the above quote. For this reason it is being placed in the bulletin so that it might be available to all who wish to have it.
* * *
February, 1966 -- In an open letter published by The Radio Gospel Fellowship, P.O. Box 72, Denver, 1, Co., Billy Graham stated several years ago: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture but, rather, the ground of our fellowship is to he the deity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I myself hold to the verbal inspiration viewpoint; I think any other position is fraught with danger. However, many of the leading evangelicals, and even fundamentalists when pinned down, do not hold to the verbal inspiration of Scripture.@ Some one should inform Dr. Graham that the verbal inspiration is not a viewpoint, hut a fact. The man Who’rejects it has no right to call himself a Christian. Fellowship on any other basis than the inerrancy of Scripture is open sin. How long will sincere faith in the deity of Christ remain if the authority of the Bible is surrendered?
* * *
March, 1966 - The Danger of Duplicity! Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., in a statement to the Greenville, S.C. press explained his objection to Billy Graham’s campaigns as follows: "So our objection is on the basis of his sponsorship, which is unscriptural on his practice of turning his converts back over to unscriptural churches and to false teachers, and recommending such men. I think that Dr. Graham is doing more harm to the cause of Jesus Christ than any living man, that he is leading foolish and untaught Christians, simple people that do not know the Word of God, into disobedience to the Word of God. That is wrong, and it is doubly wicked in that he is doing it under the pretext of a soul-winning ministry. That is our objection to Dr. Graham." And to this we say a hearty, "Amen!" The danger of duplicity lies in the fact that compromise causes the concept of the truth to change in the thinking of people. In so subtle a manner Satan leads them away from the truth of the Gospel, even while they may listen to Gospel words. There is one thing more important that soul-winning, and that is walking in the Truth. 3 John 4, "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in the truth." God requires obedience to His Word. This is Heaven’s supreme delight!
***
November, 1966 - - Within the past month a World Congress on Evangelism was held in Berlin. It was called by leaders of the New Evangelical movement, headed by Dr. Carl F. H. Henry, editor of Christianity Today, and promoted by the Billy Graham organization. It might better have been called the "World Conglomeration of Evangelism." The word "conglomeration" according to the dictionary means a "mixed mass. "And that it was! World Council officials were there. The chairman of the WCC’s department on Missions and Evangelism was a member and a featured speaker. Outright Modernist denominational spokesmen were present. Virtually every denomination was represented, the report said. Ecumenical representatives were there. Churchmen representing the Eastern Orthodox Communion (Greek Catholic) were there. Representatives of the Communist-controlled churches from Iron Curtain countries were there (anti-Communist spokesmen were arbitrarily excluded). Roman Catholic observers were present. Rabbi Arthur Gilbert, an "expert on interfaith relations" for the National Conference on Christians and Jews, was there. It was a mixed mass all right! Dr. Henry announced that no attempt would be made to determine what would come out of the conference. "It is completely in the hands of delegates," he said. One of the voices that cane out of the congress was that of Dr. Buerki-Fellenz, secretary of the Intervarsity Fellowship of Switzerland, who said some evangelists succumbed to the ideological temptation of presenting the "Christian way of life" as superior to others. Verily, verily - it was a mixed mass!
* * *
November, 1966 -- Mention was made in last week’s bulletin of the ten-day World Congress on Evangelism in Berlin which was sponsored by the compromising evangelicals, Carl Henry, Harold John Ockenga, Billy Graham & Co. We suggested that it might better have been called a conglomeration rather than a congress, the word conglomeration meaning a "mixed mass." That this congress is serving the ecumenical cause is evident from the following news report by John Cogley of theNew York Times: "In their zeal to put Evangelization in the forefront of the church’s concerns, some here have talked feebly about starting a new denomination or withdrawing from the central bodies of existing ones. The overwhelming opinion, however, is against schism or any further fragmentation of Protestantism. What the ‘Evangelicals’ in all the churches have to do, he (Carl Henry) suggested, is to stay where they are and resummon their denominational brethren to the major task of the church, preaching the Gospel." It is abundantly clear from this statement that the new evangelicals are determined to stay within the camp of apostate ecclesiasticism and conduct their program within the framework of the National and World Councils of Churches. Please note that the voice for separation was a very feeble voice, and that it was overwhelmingly vetoed. Such is the tragic consequence of compromise. The position, policy, and practice of these compromising evangelicals, of whom Billy Graham is the symbol, is diametrically opposed to the command of God’s Holy Word. See II Corinthians 6:17.
* * *
January, 1967 -- The Roman Catholic Voice for August 23, 1967, had a dispatch from Belmont, N.C., as follows: "Billy Graham, the Evangelist, will address a special convocation to be held in his honor at Belmont Abbey College here November 21. Abbot W.A. Goggins, O.S.B., of Belmont Abbey, said this special event is part of an ecumenic institute, now in the planning stage, to be held at the abbey for Protestant, Catholic and Jewish clergymen. Dr. Graham’s appearance on the Abbey campus will be his second visit to the college. On November 18, 1963, he spoke at a college assembly. it was his first appearance at a Catholic institution." On his previous visit, the executive vice president of the college, Cuthbert E. Allen, a Benedictine priest, wrote on March, 1965: "Billy Graham gave an inspiring and theologically sound address that may have been given by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen or any other Catholic preacher. I have followed Billy Graham’s career and I must emphasize that he has been more Catholic than otherwise.. .1 would state that he could bring Catholics and Protestants together in a healthy ecumenic spirit.. .Billy Graham is preaching a moral evangelical theology most acceptable to Catholics."
The event announced above is now history. Billy Graham was awarded an honorary Doctor of Human Letters degree by this Roman Catholic institution. In his remarks he said: "Now we can speak to one another, work with one another and be brothers to one another." He told his predominantly Roman Catholic audience I have a sneaking suspicion this is just a short cut to making me a Father." He said further, in referring to the gospel, "That gospel has founded this school, that gospel has brought me here tonight." The citation awarded to him praised him as a "Twentieth Century voice of the human spirit." How long will those who name the name of Christ follow this champion of compromise and confusion, this evangelical renegade, as her leads the rush back to Rome?
***
January, 1967 - What’s that again? Evangelist Billy Graham, appearing on the platform of the apostate National Council of Churches in Miami, December 5, 1966, said: "Now I believe this, that there are two conversions that we ought to have, one is converted from the world to Christ; the other is converted with Christ back to the world." Two conversions! Since when? The Bible knows of only one conversion- from the world to Christ, Galatians 6:14. When a sinner experiences this conversion, no other conversion is necessary, and particularly not one that would lead back to the world! This two-conversion notion would Sound very pleasing only to the ears of the social-gospellers whose job is to clean up the world and make it a better place to live in through the process of social reform. Commenting upon the Berlin Congress, this champion of compromise said: "If the Berlin Conference had any failures, and it did, as I look back, there was not near enough emphasis upon the social emphasis that is needed if we’re to fulfill the commands of Christ. This was one of its weaknesses and one of its failures." And there are those who say that Billy Graham has not succumbed to the impact and influence of the modernists with whom he has been cooperating through the years!
He said further: "One of the objects of this Congress on Evangelism was to gather some of those elements together along with some of the people in the conciliar movement and to have discussions and consultations and dialogues and nothing else." The truth will out! The purpose of the Berlin Congress was to promote the dialogue! Such a pronouncement would be sweet-sounding talk in the ears of the Ecu-maniacs - the builders of the One World Church. Responding to the applause that was given him, Graham said: "I am honored and privileged to be here to participate with you - and I would like to put it in those terms, to participate with you..." That’s right! By his own Confession he is part and parcel of the apostate NCC-Ecumenical program!
***
January, 1967 - Bishop Otto Dibelius, a former president of the World Council of Churches, delivered one of the key messages at Billy Graham’s Berlin Congress on Evangelism. The Standard, December 5, 1966, reports him as saying: "Whatever other noble aims characterize the World Council, evangelism is not one of them and perhaps never can be." Walter Montano, commenting upon this situation said: "Other delegates, not simply observers, expressed similar opinions. Ironically, the Congress which was called for the specific purpose of fostering evangelism had on its platform some of the most antagonistic elements to evangelism!" C. Stacey Woods made these remarks: "...there was a notable absence of Biblical authority within the Congress for which Christian methodology and experience were no adequate substitute...God’s glory was not so much considered.. .there was a neglect of the theology of evangelism and the biblical narrowness of the Gospel. ...There was some confusion about the eternal lostness of those outside of Christ ... There was little emphasis upon the holiness of God and His call to separate from all that is impure and untrue. Its theme, ‘One Race, One Gospel, One Task, was notable for the omission ‘one truth.’" Quite a contrast between this analysis and some of the glowing reports we have seen from men who should know better!
***
February, 1967 - The following is placed in the bulletin by request after its use by the pastor in the service last Lord’s Day evening. Evangelist Billy Graham, speaking before a packed meeting of the National Council of Churches in Miami Beach, December 6, 1966, is reported to have said: "We need to remind ourselves of such Scriptures as Paul wrote to the Corinthians, ‘Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.’ Now some people have interpreted that verse to mean the National Council - that you’re to come out and not touch the unclean thing. (Laughter). That’s not the meaning there. The meaning is paganism - the evils of the world. Indeed we’re to go into the world and mingle with the publicans and sinners but we’re not to participate in the moral and social evils." Can you imagine anything more pagan than the apostate program of the National Council of Churches? Can you imagine anything more filthy in its abominations that the harlot church of the Antichrist portrayed in Revelation 17, which is nothing more or less than the culmination of the unholy ecumenicism of the NCC, WCC, and RCC? Is there any room for doubt as to where this champion of compromise stands when he openly ridicules Fundamentalists and the Biblical command to separate from apostasy? Graham says stay in. God says, "Come out!" (Revelation 18:4). Isn’t it about time that men listen to God instead of Graham?
***
May, 1967 - Evangelist Billy Graham was quoted in the Tulsa Daily World, April 3, 1967, with reference to a statement made concerning the Berlin Congress: "I believe it was effective because I was invited to speak to the National Council of Churches at their meeting in December and I now have been invited to write a paper on conversion for the World Council of Churches." If acceptance in National and World Council circles is a criterion of success, he can have it! That is the kind or success we can veil do without. The diabolic program of the NCC and WCC is nothing more nor less than the building of the Church (the harlot bride, Revelation 17) of the Antichrist. Mr. Graham was in Tulsa when he made the above statement, dedicating the Oral Roberts University. It would not surprise us one bit if this champion of compromise should some day soon journey to Rome to kiss the Pope’s feet.
***
July, 1967 - According to the Fuller Seminary Theology News and Notes for May 1967, the Baccalaureate service was held in the First Methodist Church of Pasadena, with Dr. John Sutherland Bonnell of New York City as the speaker. It was this same Dr. Bonnell who in Look magazine of March 23, 1954, said: Presbyterians do not believe in the literal inerrancy of the Scriptures... .Most Presbyterians do not believe in a material heaven or hell... .With a few exceptions Presbyterians do not interpret the phrase in the Apostles’ Creed, the ‘Resurrection of the Body’ as meaning the physical body." Concerning the Virgin Birth, he said: "Some find a symbolic, rather than a physical meaning in the accounts of the birth of Jesus... .Except in minor Presbyterian groups, the doctrine of the virgin birth is not used as a test of orthodoxy in ordaining ministers and elders." The level to which Fuller Seminary has sunk may be gauged by the caliber of the men it uses. Incidentally, this blatant modernist (Bonnell) was honored on the platform of the Billy Graham evangelistic crusade in Scotland more than a dozen years ago.
In a UPI Dispatch datelined London: "American evangelist Dr. Billy Graham said today miniskirts are fine so long as they are merely a fashion style. ‘I don’t see anything wrong with them unless they are deliberately worn to entice men to have sensual thoughts,’ he said. "One thing sure - he will not lose popularity with the miniskirt crowd! But see I Timothy 2:9.
***
September, 1967 - The man who was chosen to be the head of the Graham Crusade in Greenville, S.C., in 1966 was Dr. L.D. Johnson, noted Southern Baptist leader, formerly pastor of the First Baptist Church there and now chaplain at Furman University of the SBC. He is quoted in The People’s Paper as follows: "The next two decades will be characterized by more emphasis on the ecumenical movement within Christian groups.. .Another significant change in the 70’s will have to do with understanding of Scriptures... Insistence upon the literal meaning of the Bible is no longer a tenable position among people who are educated, and the education of the American people will be the mark of the 70’s." Are you surprised that this Bible-denying ecumaniac should be chosen chairman of a Graham crusade? Don’t be. The unequal yoke of inclusivism is his practised policy. In a bulletin sent out to Southern California churches, Dr. Graham on August 21, 1963 said: "Bishop Kennedy is one of the ten greatest preachers in America." On the first Sunday of the L.A. Crusade, after a eulogy of ten minutes, he said to the great throng: "I now introduce to you my good friend and trusted advisor, Dr. E. Stanley Jones." Methodist Bishop Gerald Kennedy and Methodist missionary E. Stanley Jones are modernists of the first order. Mr. Graham has been wearing the unequal yoke for a long time! Through his cooperation with Bible-denying, Christ-rejecting modernists Billy Graham has become the all-time champion of compromise and confusion.
***
December, 1967 - Hail Mary! Evangelist Billy Graham was awarded an honorary Doctor of Human letters degree by Belmont Abbey College, a Catholic institution, on Tuesday evening, November 21. "Now," said Billy Graham to his predominantly Roman Catholic audience, "we can speak to one another, work with one another and be brothers to one another.., He told his young audience: "I have a sneaking suspicion that this is just a short cut to making me a Father. He paid his respects to the "gospel of Christ," by saying. "That gospel has founded this school, that gospel has brought me here tonight." The citation said in part: "When time has sifted the 20th Century, and most of us have receded into statistics, there will remain visible to the eye of history a relatively few men whose individual minds and wills have significantly shaped the events of our world. In this small company - the company of Picasso and Einstein, of Schweitzer, Churchill and Pope John XXIII - will certainly be found the figure of William Franklin Graham." He was further praised as a "Twentieth Century voice of the human spirit." Hail Mary!
***
March, 1968 - The United Church Observer of July 1, 1966, carried an article in which evangelist Billy Graham was asked to submit answers to 26 "provocative" questions. One of these was on the Virgin Birth. Question: Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin Birth - not just as a symbol of the incarnation or of Christ’s divinity - as an historic event is necessary for personal salvation? Answer: "While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation." This is a classic example of "operation double-talk," at which the Neo-Evangelicals are so adept. In one breath he affirms belief in the virgin birth (this pleases evangelicals), and in the next breath he says that belief in the virgin birth is not necessary to salvation (this pleases the liberals). If Christ be not the virgin-born Son of God, He could not be our Saviour. To reject the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is to reject the only Saviour that God has provided for sinners. There can be no personal salvation apart from faith in the virgin-born Son of God! It is time that this mealy-mouthed, double-tongued, compromising evangelical tell us why he believes in the virgin birth at all if he does not consider it necessary to salvation.
***
June, 1968 - The bulletin of the Anti-Defamation League for December, 1967 has an article entitled "My C:onversation with Billy Graham" by Rabbi Arthur Gilbert who was an observer at the Berlin Congress on Evangelism. The interview took place at Graham’s home where the Rabbi was a guest. "Billy said that as he grew in sensitivity his own method of handling Jews attending his crusades had changed. When Jews step forward at his crusades, he makes no special missionary appeal for their conversion." Billy declared, "Jews have a right to be respected for what they are - a people who still live by the Light of God in the Old Testament." Rabbi Gilbert wrote, "Unlike some fundamentalist opponents of Christian social action, Billy insisted that Christians, individually and through their corporate structures, must enter the social arena and seek to improve society." Dr. Graham was quoted: "It is wrong to presume that the sufferings of the Jews are a consequence alone of their denial of Jesus. Certainly it is Biblical to suggest that man suffers punishment as a consequence of sinfulness, but there is also a suffering that is martyrdom. All men are in need of God’s forgiveness. Jews are under no special guilt and, in fact, the Church stands in the same need of forgiveness." Graham further said: "that Christ is the way to God’s forgiving love but it ill behooves me to judge Jews as a people lost to salvation. God, in his own time and way, will judge all men by the light according to which they live. We must distinguish he who lives by no revelation from one who knows that God is revealed in nature, in the world, and in history. The believing Jew’s approach to life is testimony to his faithfulness to the God of his fathers. Christians must respect such devotedness to God." Rabbi Gilbert said, "I left Montreat satisfied that our dialogue would continue, encouraged that evangelicals are no longer inaccessible. I left Montreat respectful of Christianity - and strengthened in my Judaism." And we might add, still lost and on the way to hell!
***
August, 1968 - Heaven and Hollywood do not mix, but the "new evangelicals" are giving it a try. Roy Rogers and Dale Evans, who are often featured at Graham ecumenical crusades, were billed as putting on the dance shows through July 24 at the night-club at Harrah’s gambling casino in Reno.
***
December, 1968 - Pike’s Pulpit: On December 4, 1960, Billy Graham addressed a men’s group in conjunction with the opening meeting of the National Council of Churches from the pulpit of Grace Cathedral, the pulpit of the blaspheming Bishop James Pike. He spoke to an overflow audience. Graham was an honored guest at the consecration service for the Bishop in Grace Cathedral on May 15, 1958, and that same night Graham praised Bishop Pike in glowing terms from the platform of the Cow Palace where he was holding one of his evangelistic campaigns. Later, on Saturday, May 24, 1958, this campion of compromise had Pike on the platform at the Cow Palace to read the evening prayer after warm words of praise. So on December 4, 1960, Pike invited Graham into Grace Cathedral pulpit for the NCC address, and the Bishop concluded the service by pronouncing the benediction. Thus did Evangelist Billy Graham give public recognition and join in fellowship and testimony with one of the most blatant blasphemers of the twentieth century! Yet some people say, "so what - he’s ‘winning souls’ isn’t he?" We had better get it firmly fixed in mind that there is one thing more important to God than "winning souls," and that is obedience to His Holy Word. "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth." (III John 4) This is Heaven’s supreme delight! It is not merely how we talk, but how we walk, that counts with God! Those who do not have sense enough to see that what Billy Graham is doing is wrong are devoid of spiritual discernment.
***
December, 1968 - A compromised Christianity has produced some phenomenal converts. Actress Jane Russell divorced her husband of many years, and a few days later married actor Roger Barrett. Waterfield had previously lamented that "Miss" Russell was a lush drunk most of the time. Her explanation for switching mates was: "I finally found a man with whom I could discuss religion, philosophy and the theater. Up to now my conversation at home was limited to football. One of Billy Graham’s early converts, and described by Graham as a "very lovely Christian girl," this Hollywood whore has consistently played the part of a bad woman in the films in which she has been featured since her conversion, one of them so rotten that Hollywood’s own censorship bureau refused to pass it. She was quoted inPageant Magazine, June 1964, as saying: "I’m a religious person. I believe in doing right. But it would be a hoax to describe me as a stainless creature. I go to church and believe in God, but also, as the saying goes, I smoke, I drink, I chew, and I go with the boys who do. This about sums it up." A lovely Christian girl?
***
April, 1969 - The following is taken from the testimony of Mrs. Rosina Hart of Oratia, Auckland, New Zealand, who was converted in a Graham campaign in April 1959 and who, two years later was converted from "Billy Grahamism. (Copies of her complete testimony will be sent free of charge to those who will prayerfully use them, and who will write to her at the above address.) Her conversion from Grahamism took place when listening to Billy Graham on a short-wave radio from the powerful HCJB station in South America, he said things that every converted Roman Catholic knows to be false. He simply spoke about Roman Catholics as though they were Christians like others who helped in the Graham crusades. He spoke of Roman Catholics everywhere as though they were all born-again, true Christians of the family of God. It was so obvious to a converted Roman Catholic that this was completely false, and it came as a great shock to have ‘adorable’ Billy speak and act so unwisely and wrongly. Then, of course, Billy’s further statements were listened to and it became certain that this was no slip of the tongue, but that Billy had re-oriented his thinking and his whole attitude to bring in the Church of Rome as just another branch of the Christian Church. He had widened his platform to take in Rome. A little later, when the cardinals were meeting to choose a new Pope, Billy was heard to pray that they, the cardinals, might be guided by the Holy Spirit in the choice they would make.... it was at variance with the revealed Word of God that anyone should hold as brothers and sisters in the Lord those who worship Mary rather than Christ, who sacrifice Christ again in every celebrating of the Mass, and who live entirely in the darkness of superstition and idolatry. it became clear that Graham was approving what God abhors. He was embracing what God judged and called Jezebel and the Mother of Harlots.. .he was praying for the Holy Spirit to bless what God had cursed!"
***
April, 1969 - In an open letter, published by Albert H. Salter, Denver, Co., Billy Graham stated as far back as 1958: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture but, rather, the ground of our fellowship is to be the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. I, myself hold to the verbal inspiration Viewpoint; I think any other position is fraught with danger. However, many of the leading evangelical5, and even fundamentalists when pinned down do not hold to the verbal inspiration of Scripture. I have accepted my position by faith!" Just how long does Mr. Graham think that the doctrine of the deity of Christ can be maintained without an inerrant Bible? Or any other fundamental doctrine of the Faith? The inerrancy of Scripture is not a mere theory among other theories of inspiration. It is absolute fact, and as absolute truth it is the fundamental of all fundamentals! The very moment Mr. Graham removes Christian fellowship from the foundation of an inerrant Bible, he transplants it from the ground of absolute truth to the shifting sands of a relative concept. All of which means that he is no longer preaching the Gospel, no matter how piously he may mouth Gospel words. To preach verbal inspiration, the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, and other fundamental doctrines merely as a matter of "viewpoint" or "theory" is to reject the Gospel in its full authority of absolute truth. This is making a shipwreck of the Faith! This is apostasy in its incipient stage! How serious is the sin of those who support it!
***
April, 1969 - It is a matter of record! In The United Church Observer, July 1, 1966, Billy Graham answered 26 provocative questions. Here is one of them: Question - "Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin Birth, not just as a symbol of the incarnation, or of Christ’s divinity, as an historic event, is necessary for personal salvation?" Dr. Graham’s answer - "While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that the particular belief is necessary for personal salvation." Can a man preach the Gospel of Christ who denies that belief in the Virgin Birth is necessary for personal salvation? Certainly not! If Jesus Christ be not virgin born, then He was not the Son of God; and if He be not the Son of God, then He cannot be the Saviour of Sinners. it is just as simple as that! The "gospel" of Billy Graham is a shallow, superficial, spurious "gospel" - it is not the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. It matters not that he says he believes in it personally. If it is not necessary for salvation, why believe it or preach it at all? Unless we believe the Virgin Birth of Christ to be fundamental to the Faith we do not believe the Gospel. Graham’s "Gospel" is a perverted "gospel." He is making a shipwreck of the Faith.
***
May, 1969 - Further evidence that Billy Graham does not believe the doctrine of the Virgin Birth necessary to salvation appears in his own Decision magazine as far back as 1962. Dr. Graham appeared on a panel with Harvard Professor Richard Niebuhr a radical neo-orthodox theologian, and formerly a professor at the infamous Yale Divinity School. In the discussion Niebuhr stated: "My view is that the virgin birth does not make a bit of difference. I can’t get angry at anybody for holding it, but on the other hand I certainly don’t hold it myself. I’ll be glad to tell you why. As far as I am able to figure out in my own reflections, the virgin birth has nothing to do with the meaning of Jesus Christ as one who suffers and dies and is raised in our behalf. I think this would be the heart of the gospel, or kerygma, as we say today." To which Graham responded: "Dr. Niebuhr and I would disagree at the point of the virgin birth." This will please evangelicals. Then he added: ". . .but it is not the heart of the kerygma. I would agree at this point. "This will please the liberals. He personally believes in the virgin birth, but agrees with the infidel Niebuhr that it is not the heart of the Gospel! In other words, it is not necessary to salvation. How about that? If the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is not the heart of the Gospel, what possible value can the death and resurrection of Christ have for us? Absolutely none. If Christ be not the virgin born Son of God, His death and resurrection are meaningless. He could not be the Saviour of sinners. By saying the virgin birth is not the heart of the Gospel, Graham is tearing the very heart out of the Gospel!
***
May, 1969 - In a lecture at Union Theological Seminary, February 17, 1954, Billy Graham. speaking on faith, said: "Last year, Dr. Jesse Bader and Charles Templeton and John Bonnell and I locked ourselves in a room here in New York City for all day. I asked Dr. Bonnell, ‘If you were an evangelist today, what would be the basis of your message?’ He got up out of the chair and he paced the floor. He said, "I think the number one need today is an emphasis on the word ‘commitment.’ That’s it!" And this is the word Graham has been using ever since. But commitment to what? Two months later, in an article entitled "What Is A Presbyterian?" this same Dr. Bonnell wrote: "They, therefore, emphasize inspired men, not inspired words. (Except for a minority, Presbyterians do not believe in the literal inerrancy of the Scriptures.)" ... "They do not conceive of heaven as a place with gates of pearl and streets of gold. Nor do they think of hell as a place where the souls of condemned are punished in fire and brimstone".... "Except in minor Presbyterian groups the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is not used as a test of orthodoxy..." So says one of the pious prayer partners with whom Billy Graham locked himself up for a whole day. Such fellowship is a fellowship of wickedness!
***
May, 1969 - - A word of warning was given personally to Billy Graham by Dr. Charles J. Woodbridge, formerly a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary, who left that institution when he saw the direction it was taking in the mainstream of the New Evangelical current. At a time when his counsel was sought by Mr. Graham, Dr. Woodbridge issued this warning: "If you persist in making common cause with these who deny the Word of God, and thus in minimizing the sharp lone of distinction between those who are loyal and disloyal to the Scriptures, it is my strong opinion the verdict of church history will be that you be will be known as the greatest divider of the church of Christ in the 20th century." We are not stretching the truth one bit when we say that Billy Graham has become the champion of compromise and confusion. According to Christian Life Magazine for March 1956, Graham said: "I don’t call myself a fundamentalist." Though once associated with Dr. John Rice and Sword of the Lord, Graham dissociated himself because he could no longer in good conscience sign the statement required for membership on the Sword of the Lord board, which reads as follows: "Standing for the verbal Inspiration of the Bible, the Deity of Christ, His Blood Atonement, Salvation by Faith, New Testament Soul Winning and the Premillennial Return of Christ. Opposes Modernism, Wor1dliness and Formalism." Since then Graham has described himself as a man with "an evangelical message and an ecumenical heart.
***
June, 1969 - A note received this past week from Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., President of B.J.U., reads as follows: "I have just seen the copy of your May 18 bulletin in which you quote from a chapel talk I made prior to Billy Graham’s coming to Greenville. I appreciate your making this available to your people, and I am grateful for the kind comment at the close. We appreciate you and your friendship and are grateful for the stand you take." Just prior to the Greenville campaign, the pastor wrote to Dr. Jones: "Greetings in the precious Name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ! Just a brief word to let you know that we are supporting you in prayer in a very definite way during the period that the Graham campaign is being conducted in Greenville. We are deeply grateful to the Lord for your faithful and forthright stand against the compromising ecumenical evangelism of this traitor to the Truth, and are completely confident that God our Heavenly Father will give you a great victory in your raising of the standard in defense of the Faith once delivered to the saints. "To Dr. Graham the pastor wrote: "Enclosed is the copy of a letter forwarded to Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., endorsing his faithful and forthright stand against your compromise of the Truth through cooperation with Bible-denying. Christ rejecting modernists in the conduct of your campaigns. I earnestly implore you, Dr. Graham, to repent of your sin and thus deliver yourself from the judgment of Almighty God which rests upon all such compromise of the Truth.
***
July, 1969 - An ecumenical voice! Dr. G. Paul Musselman, Executive Director of the Department of Evangelism of the National Council of Churches, describing the work of Billy Graham, said: "I call Billy Graham the newest and greatest of the ecumenical voices." Back in 1948, when Graham was asked what he thought of the World Council of Churches to be organized in August of that year, he said: "I believe they are going to nominate the Anti-Christ." He was right then; he is wrong now. The Word of God has not changed, but Billy Graham surely has! He is now helping to build the church of the Anti-Christ! And those who support him are helping him to build it.
***
June, 1969 - Dr. Walter S. Patrick, pastor of a Bible Church in Lynbrook. Long Island, has asked some rather pertinent questions: "Why does Dr. Graham advise converts to ‘go to the church of your own choice,’ instead of directing them to fundamental assemblies? Why does Dr. Graham recommend the modernisticRevised Standard Version of the Bible, which denies the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus? Why does Dr. Graham insist upon having modernists and liberalists serving with fundamentalists on his various crusade committees? Why does Dr. Graham speak of himself as a ‘conservative liberal’ and a ‘constructionist;’ rather than an old-fashioned fundamentalist? Why can’t he say today, as he did on May 29,1951, ‘I have never been, nor will I ever be, in favor of a modernist being on the committee?’" Yes, Mr. Graham, Why?
***
August, 1969 -- BILLY AND THE BISHOP! Bishop Gerald Kennedy (Methodist), who figured so prominently in the 1963 Los Angeles Graham campaign, wrote the following on the jacket of one of Dr. Nels Ferre’s most blasphemous books: "The Sun and the Umbrella is a modern parable written in the power and spirit of the New Testament, it cuts right to the heart of our muddled theology. We have stood in need of this clarification of the person of Jesus. If it shocks certain traditionalists, it will thrill sincere, world minded Christians. Nels Ferre has given us the clue for a truly universal Christianity." And in just what manner does blaspheming Ferre clarify the "person" of Jesus? On p. 35 he says: "To call Jesus God is to substitute an idol for the incarnation." On p. 39 he says further: "The use of the Bible as the final authority for Christian truth is idolatry." This is the same blaspheming Ferre who brazenly suggested that the conception of Christ in the womb of Mary might well have been the result of an affair she had with a German mercenary soldier near a military camp outside Jerusalem. What utter blasphemy! And where does this place the celebrated Bishop Kennedy who so whole-heartedly endorsed the Bible-denying, Christ-rejecting Nels Ferre? According to II John 11, Gerald Kennedy is a partaker, a participant, in the evil deeds and blasphemy of Ferre. "For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." This is the same Gerald Kennedy who was appointed chairman of the 1963 Los Angeles Graham campaign. So where does this leaves Graham and his Supporters? it makes them partakers, participants in the evil deeds of Kennedy, those evil deeds are the evil deeds of Nels Ferre. Two and two still add up to four!
***
September, 1969 - Another conglomeration! Appearing in the Orlando Sentinel this past week was a UPI report in which it was stated that "More than 5,000 churchmen met Monday in the first U.S. Congress on Evangelism, hoping to dispel current unrest over Christian priorities by sparking a national revival. Before the Rev. Billy Graham opened the week-long meeting with an evening service in Minneapolis’ convention hall, the two strict Fundamentalist groups criticized the congress as ungodly and soft on sin. The congress has drawn preachers, pastors and laymen from 100 major and minor Protestant denominations. Their ways of interpreting the Bible and looking at theology are not always the same, and the fact of their getting together under one roof has upset some church associations that stand fast on their own conservatism." Reminiscent of the Berlin Congress of a few years ago, the inclusivistic nature and compromising character of the current congress adds up to another "conglomeration." A conglomeration is a "mixed mass," or better yet, a messy mixture.
***
August, 1969 - -Time Magazine, June 26, 1969, reported on the Billy Graham Crusade: "He confessed amiably to one audience that his wife Ruth - who teaches Sunday School to hippie-esque students near their Montreat, N.C. home - had tried unsuccessfully to get him to grow a beard. As an innovation, the crusade sponsored an auditorium-sized psychedelic ‘coffee house’ in a building a block from the Garden. There long-haired groups blared ‘spiritual’ rock, miniskirted girls sang on a platform, and listeners sipped soft drinks and talked with some of Graham’s 1000 counselors about religion." What a way to "win souls"! Sensational! Spectacular! Satanic! If this isn’t enough to sicken one’s spiritual stomach, what will it take? One doesn’t have to dance around a golden calf in order to be guilty of idolatry. All he need do is join the Billy Graham camp and he will find himself right in the midst of idol-worshippers. It is never right to do wrong to get an opportunity to do right!
October, 1969 - -More on the conglomeration! The Christian News for September 22, 1969, reported the following: "Three black evangelists attending the U.S. Congress on Evangelism are shown as they told a press conference in Minneapolis that they favor the ‘Black Manifesto’ and the concept of ‘reparations’ to blacks. Left to right, they are the Rev. Nelson Trout, the Rev. Tom Skinner, and the Rev. Howard Jones." Speak up Mr. Graham! Where do you stand? Are you in favor of the Black Manifesto too? The man honored as the main speaker on Friday, September 10, was Dr. Ralph Abernathy. He called for the recognition of Red China and an immediate end to the Viet Nam war. Just what has all this liberal-socialist-.communist propaganda to do with preaching the Gospel? It should he evident to all this so-called Congress on Evangelism sponsored by Billy Graham was a complete sell-out to the social gospel!
***
January, 1970 -- The champion of compromise and confusion is to he honored by the Devil’s own fraternity. According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer for November 26, 1970. "Evangelist Billy Graham will be given the highest honor of the National Conference of Christian and Jews, The International Brotherhood Award, in Cleveland, March 14, next year.... For the NCCJ banquet, Dr. Graham will arrive in Cleveland shortly after a crusade he is planning in Africa... About 2,000 are expected to attend. All proceeds will be used to further the work of the NCCJ in this area... .The NCCJ President also said the award would recognize Dr. Graham’s ‘lifetime of crusading to bring all men together under the Fatherhood of God. His moral preachings based on the Judeo-Christian concept of the quality of man have been an inspiration and source of consolation to all religiously motivated people.’ His appeal to both secular and non-secular worlds is apparent in the wide range of groups honoring him." The 20th century Balaam has sold himself out to Satan!
***
April, 1970 - - Dr. Charles Woodbridge has written a two-page statement entitled, "Why I No Longer Support The ‘Word of Life’ Movement." Among other reasons given appear the following: "Jack (Wyrtzen) does not hesitate to appear on the platform along with new evangelical leaders. He was publicized as a speaker at Hampton Dubose Academy along with Grady Wilson and Roy Gustafson, well known as members of the Billy Graham team. I Wrote back a letter and asked how he could do this. To date I have received no reply. Jack does not hesitate to invite New Evangelicals as speakers at his summer camp. One of these speakers for the summer of 1970 is Mr. Richard Bennett of England. In Mr. Bennett’s publicity he tells the public, apparently without any apology, that he has been associated with Barrington College, the Inter-Varsity movement, the Greater European Mission, the ministry of Dr. Stephen Olford, who served as vice president of the Graham crusade, I am informed, in New York City. If Jack realized that a life and death struggle is being waged between the Word of God and the entire new evangelical position, surely he would not be hobnobbing with these men who, in my opinion, are helping to pave the way for the Babylon of the Book of Revelation." The complete statement may be secured from the author, 1595 Los Osos Valley Road, Ca. 93401.
***
June, 1970 -- The number of well-known apostates who have been honored by Dr. Graham in his crusades, congresses, Decision magazines is now frightfully large. Among the scores of deniers of the Faith who have been commended by this double-hearted, double-tongued, double-dealing champion of compromise and confusion are: Dr. H.P. Van Dusen, of Union Seminary, the late Bishop James A. Pike, Bishop Gerald B. Kennedy, Emjlio Castro of Montevideo, Bishop Richard Raines of Indianapolis, Bishop Hazen G. Werner of Columbus, Archbishop Arthur Michael Ramsay, of Canterbury, the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Dr. Helmut Thielicke of Germany, Dr. L. D. Johnson of Greenville, Dr. E. Stanley Jones, Father John B. Sheenin of the Catholic World, the late Dr. Karl Barth of Switzerland, Dr. Elton Trueblood of Earlham College, Dr. Leslie Weatherhead of Great Britain, Dr. John A. Mackay of Princeton, Dr. Carl G. Howie of Detroit, Dr. Walter Judd of Minneapolis, Rabbi Arthur Gilbert of the Anti-Defamation League, Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, the late Dr. Toyohika Kagawa of Japan, Dr. John Sutherland Bonnell of New York, Dr. Robert Raines of Yale, Dr. Ralph Abernathy of Atlanta, Canon Bryan Green of Britain, Bishop Otto Dibelius of Germany, Dr. Lynn Turner of Columbus, Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher of Britain, Dr. Charles H. Dodds of London, and Bishop Leslie Newbigin of India. What in the name of all that is holy does Billy Graham hope to gain through fellowship and cooperation with such Bible- denying, Christ-rejecting agents of Satan as those listed above? See III John 7-11.
***
June, 1970 - In an article entitled "Aftermath of the Billy Graham Crusade in New York," Dr. William Ward Ayer stated: "Perhaps the most disappointing thing of all was for the people to see prominent liberals against whom they had been warned by their faithful pastors appear on the platform again and again to receive the praise of the evangelist and others. On one or two occasions, those who were called upon to lead in prayer and have other part, were so completely on the other side of the theological fence from the majority who were there in the Garden that a groan of protest went up from the audience. Those who know Billy best say that it is his amiable personality that makes him believe that he can become a sort of pontiff - or bridge builder between Bible believing Christians and those attractive personalities who are the proponents of the non-redemptive Gospel.... I do believe that the reason there is no real soul-shaking revival in the Billy Graham crusade, and he himself admits it and deplores it, claiming that he is not a revivalist but an evangelist, is because there is no severe condemnation of sin, and therefore, very little deep repentance. Billy spreads himself too thin; he tries not to offend anybody in any way. As a result, I am inclined to believe from the investigation that I have made that the conversions are not deep and life-changing as they otherwise might be." A compromised message is a superficial message, and a superficial message produces superficial converts. Any form of Christianity made comfortable through compromise is bound to be counterfeit!
***
July, 1970 - Appearing in the local paper this pat week was the following: "Comedian Bob Hope, Monday, predicted at least 400,000 people will take part in ‘Honor America’ celebrations here Saturday. Hope, who heads the organizing committee for the event along with Evangelist Billy Graham, said he does not expect any trouble from anti-war demonstrators. Although the July 4 Independence Day celebrations have the blessing of the Nixon Administration, Hope denied its purpose was political...Hope said it would improve the American image for foreigners ‘to see a bunch of Americans finally having a good time.’ The celebrations, starting in the morning and continuing in the night will include parades, bands, a fire-works display and an open air entertainment with more than a dozen internationally known stars...Asked about a threat by some radical youth leaders that thousands of young people might stage a marijuana smoke-in the midst of the celebration, Hope joked: ‘Well I may join them for that.’" Among the entertainers invited were Dick Gregory, a fierce critic of the Viet Nam war and the White American establishment, and the Smothers Brothers. There is an old saying about birds of a feather flocking together. All we can say is - what a flock! P.S.: The 20th century Balaam is to be the principal speaker.
***
August, 1970 - Counterfeit Christianity! "Pat Boone and the Gift of Tongues" is the title of a new book to be published in September by Dr. James D. Bales of Harding College, Searcy, Arkansas. We are informed that Boone, who is being currently featured in TV spectaculars by Campus Crusade throughout the country, is now involved in the tongues movement. This is the joker who was brought right from a gambling casino in Las Vegas to perform at the Graham Congress on Evangelism in Minneapolis a year ago. It is just a week ago in the evening service that we gave warning against the peril of Pentecostalism. Here it is in the guise of the New Evangelicalism!
***
August, 1970 - Taking the Heat Out of Hell! Billy Graham, in a message on hell, said: "Hell is not a sadistic torture chamber." He assured his audience that some preachers have made hell so hot with a vivid imagination that they have made it "abhorrent to the love of God." That language pleases modernists very well. He went further and gave assurance that modernists like Albert Schweitzer would not go there. He said: "Could Adolph Hitler and Albert Schweitzer go to the same place?" Yes, Mr. Graham, both will go to the same place because both rejected the Lord Jesus Christ as personal Saviour. Indeed, Mr. Graham, the sin of the modernist Schweitzer in rejecting the Bible and the Bible’s Christ, in spite of all his humanitarian achievements, is far greater than all, of the wickedness of an Adolph Hitler. By now both have learned that hell is hotter than you apparently think it is. By now they have learned that it is all the Son of God said it would be when he described it four times (Luke 16:19-31) as a place of torment. And if hell be not a torture chamber, Mr. Graham, tell us, please, the meaning of Revelation 14:9-11! "Tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb!" If the Bible means what it says, and it surely does, the writhing of Christ-rejecting sinners in eternal, conscious torment of a never-ending hell will be a source of complete satisfaction to a righteous and holy God. You had better believe it, Mr. Graham!
***
November, 1970 - Satanic Strategy! United Methodists for Evangelical Christianity held a Convocation in Dallas, August 26-29, 1970, drawing an attendance of sixteen hundred. The speakers included Bishop Gerald Kennedy, a unitarian in theology, who shared the platform with black Baptist evangelist Tom Skinner. The MethodistAdvocate of Mississippi for September 9, 1970, quoted Skinner: "A radical is a person who gets to the root of the problem.. . .A revolutionist is one who would take an existing unworkable system, throw it away, and create a new, better system." In the same issue this prominent neo-evangelist Black leader was further quoted: "The evangelical conservative wing of the theological church has been brainwashed by certain political conservatives of this country who have wrapped the American flag around Jesus so that to stand up in the name of God and to speak against the problems of our society and to speak against racism and injustice results in being called anarchists." This is the same man who appeared at Billy Graham’s Minneapolis Congress on Evangelism and when questioned about the influence of Communism in race riots declared: "I don’t want to dignify Communism by giving it credit for the revolution. But if they are stirring it up, does that make the Communists good guys or bad guys?" Christianity Today quotes Mr. Skinner, January 2, 1970: "Education will change its emphasis from the study of history to creative preparation for the future. The message of Jesus Christ then must be preached in that vein... .This means the Gospel of Christ must be preached in the language of that age group and in a way relevant to its life style." This is the social gospel emphasis pure and simple!
***
May, 1971 - Request was made for a copy of the following item which was used by the pastor in the message of last Lord’s Day evening. It is reproduced here for the purpose of making it available to all. In Christianity Today, August 18, 1967, it was reported: "Jesus might have been homosexual, suggests the vicar of Cambridge University’s main church. Canon Hugh Montifore told a modern Churchmen’s conference at Oxford that Jesus need not have been hindered from marriage by lack of money or possible mates. ‘Women were his friends, but it is men he is said to have loved.’ the vicar added." In his book entitled Is There Not a Cause? R.C. Suiter makes the frightening disclosure: "Canon Hugh W. Montifiore was advisor for the Cambridge Billy Graham Television Crusade in England." Identification with such religious reprobates in deliberate disobedience to the Word of God is reason enough why no Bible-believing, Christ honoring Christian should be a supporter of Billy Graham in his program of ecumenical evangelism. To do so is to become a partaker of his evil deeds, which evil deeds are the evil deeds of the Bible-denying, Christ-rejecting modernists with whom he identifies himself, II John 11.
***
July, 1971 - The Oregon Journal for June 30, 1971, carried Billy Graham's column, "My Answer": Question -"You have been called a conservative in theology. Isn’t this concept of Christianity so out of step with modern problems that it is irrelevant?" Answer -"I would rather be an evangelical theologically, but I do admit that:a high Biblical view is irrelevant and 'out of step' with modern problems." The champion of compromise and confusion is really outdoing, himself. Just how can one be evangelically sound \who does not hold a high view of the Bible?
***
August, 1971 --At the Los Angeles crusade in 1963 Billy Graham spent ten minutes eulogizing Dr. E. Stanley Jones and then said, "I now introduce to you my good friend and my trusted advisor, Dr. E. Stanley Jones." In his book, Christ and the Round Table (page 257), Dr. Jones has stated, "If verbal infallibility is insisted upon, then the certainty is very precarious." In his Song of Accents, Jones says: "We do not believe that the New Testament is the revelation of God
that would be the Word become printer's ink."(p.377) In the same book, on pages 148-149 he says: "I had to go outside my native land to make a discovery of the kingdom of God. I found it of all places, in Russia." With such a friend and trusted advisor, it is no wonder that Mr. Graham has become the 20th century champion of compromise and confusion. "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3) The answer to this question is absolutely no! When Billy
Graham finds in E. Stanley Jones a trustworthy friend and advisor he announces himself as a heretic of the first order. When asked why he didn't speak out against Communism, Billy said: "For years I have not spoken about that. I cannot go around the world and say who is right and who is wrong." (Chicago Tribune, April, 1970) Just imagine the prophet Elijah ,standing before godless Ahab saying, "I can't go around Israel saying who is right and who is wrong. Let's have a meaningful dialogue with the prophets of Baal!" Elijah was a man of God; Graham is not.
* * *
September, 1971 --Graham's Gospel! In the July 1, 1966 issue of The United Church Observer, official magazine of the United Church of Canada, there appeared a list of 26 questions which the editor put to Billy Graham, along with his answers. One of these questions was: "Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin Birth - not just as a symbol of the incarnation or of Christ's divinity - as an historic event is necessary for personal salvation?" Graham answered: "While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation." And there are some people who still insist that Billy Graham preaches the Gospel' If it were not for the Virgin Birth of Christ, His death upon the cross would be absolutely meaningless. There would be no salvation; there would be no Gospel. To preach an evangelical doctrine as a purely relative concept is to reject the Gospel just as completely as though one were to make an outright denial. A refusal to believe in the Virgin Birth excludes one completely from saving faith in Christ. Graham's answer is an excellent example of dialectical double-talk. The word "dialectical" refers to a double standard. The first part of his answer was designed to please, and ensnare, evangelicals; the last part was designed to curry the favor of the modernists and liberals. He has become the Master Mush-Mouth of the 20th century!
* * *
October, 1971 - Dr. William E. Ashbrook, in his book The New Neutralism, 7th edition, p. 75, under the heading "Shallow Youth Movements," says: "Since the popular Christian youth movements of our day have all hitched their wagons to Billy Graham's star, we "would expect to find all their testimonies in the New Evangelical mode. This is indeed the case with Youth For Christ, Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade and others. The Arminian philosophy of their leaders seems to tell them that 'the foolishness of preaching' is no longer a valid method for winning the lost. In their thinking, tried and proven methods of evangelism have failed and God is losing out - He desperately needs help! And the help the Lord's work needs is to be found in dressing up the gospel message with backdrops of glamour and beauty queens and football stars, supplemented with the sweet strains of folk and Beatle music accompanied by the twanging strings of a few guitars' Much of the technique has been learned from the Graham Crusade extravaganzas with their movie queens, nightclub singers and movie gush." In the Orlando Sentinel, October 23: "Miss Vonda Kay Van Dyke, Miss America of 1965, will be the featured speaker at 7:30 P. M. November 1, Municipal Auditorium, in a decency rally sponsored by the Orlando Youth For Christ (YFC) organization." Now working in TV and movies, this glamour gal won her hon&s in the flesh pots of Atlantic City.
***
January, 1972 - - In the Sunday Magazine, June 1966, Billy Graham was asked what he thought of the story of Adam and Eve. He replied: "The story of Adam? How you believe in it doesn’t affect the doctrine. Either at a certain moment in evolution God breathed into one particular ape-man who was Adam, or I believe God could have taken a handful of dust and blowed and created a man just like that." But, Mr. Graham, the Bible tells us how God did create man (Genesis 2:7), and this fact does affect doctrine. It rules out any possibility whatsoever off the damnable theory of evolution, including the threshold theory taught at Wheaton College.
***
January, 1972 - - According to an extensive four column interview by Christian Century writer William Thorkelson in the Minneapolis Star for December 13, 1971, Billy Graham stated that Leighton Ford, his brother-in-law, would very likely be his successor. Said Mr. Graham: "I am sure if anything happened to me, he would succeed me." The Star continued: "Leighton Ford, he said, has told him that three people have been converted to Christ through ‘Superstar.’" What is that again, Mr. Graham? Do you and your brother-in-law really believe that people can be converted to Christ through that blasphemous Rock Opera Superstar? If so, your "Christ" is not my Christ, for your "Christ" is not the Christ of the Bible! The Christ of the Bible is the eternal Son of God incarnate in human flesh, a Supernatural Saviour, not a humanized, glamourized, hippie-type Superstar. If Ford and Graham think for one moment that genuine conversions to Christ can take place through the medium of such blasphemy, they reveal but one thing: how utterly destitute they themselves are of spiritual discernment. May God have mercy on gullible saints if Ford is to be the successor to Graham!
***
February, 1972 - - Cheap Conversions: According to the late Bill Rose, religious news writer on the West Coast, about one third of the 21,670 persons who registered "decisions for Christ" at the Oakland Billy Graham crusade last summer gave fictitious names or fraudulent addresses.
***
February, 1972 - - In a letter dated April 20, 1971, Terry Inman of Oakland, Cal., stated: "The Jesus Movement which has been widely publicized by magazines and newspapers has brought excitement to many youth. Unfortunately some of this excitement has created a pseudo-Christian subculture that is filled with every philosophy, religion and immorality that has plagued youth for years. Jesus is being portrayed as a flourescent Solid Rock Superstar, who believes a little dope won’t hurt anyone, and that premarital sex is all right. For your information we can document the following: 1.- There are Jesus type houses that have sex orgies in the Name of Christ. 2.- There are leaders in the Jesus Fad movement that teach polygamy. 3.- There are underground newspapers that have used four letter words to propagate Christ. 4.- There are groups which use drugs as part of the Christian ritual of worship." The "Jesus" of the Jesus Movement is "another Jesus," and not the Jesus of the Bible. In a news article by Rev. David Poling (son of the late Dan Poling), he writes: "Right now the Jesus movement is mainly made up of young people. But their close companion and frequent counsel is a tall grandfather from Montreat, Billy Graham, who speaks to their condition with understanding and grace." What kind of counsel and advice are you giving them, Billy?
***
May, 1972 -- How hot is Hell? In the Decision, magazine for April, Dr. Billy Graham, in a sermon on "Heaven and Hell", says: "Jesus used three words to describe the place or condition that lies at the end of the broad road. One is ‘fire.’ Jesus told the story about the rich man who went to Hell and asked that Lazarus might dip the tip of his finger in water and cool the rich man’s tongue. Could it be that the fire Jesus talked about is an eternal search for God that is never quenched? Is that what it means? That indeed would be Hell; to be away from God forever, separated from His presence." Would it, Mr. Graham? Just how do you figure that totally depraved rebellious sinners, who hate God and reject Christ in this life, will search for Him in eternity? If they spit in His face and spurn His mercy, if they seek Him not now, what makes you think they will search for Him then? Hell is not a place where men go who wanted to find God in this life, but couldn’t find Him. You had better learn, Mr. Graham, that Hell is a place of punishment for incorrigibles, who, if they were to be brought back and given another chance, would do the same thing they did the first time - spit in His face and spurn His mercy. Read a little farther in your Bible, Mr. Graham, and you will see that the fire of Hell is a "flame. Why not believe and preach it as it is, instead of adopting the approach of the liberals who do their best to take the heat out of Hell?
***
May, 1972 - - The highest Roman Catholic Award given by the Franciscan priests, the International Franciscan Award, was given to Dr. Billy Graham on April 21, 1972, according to the Minneapolis Star for April 22, 1972. It was given in "recognition of his contribution to true ecumenism" and for his "sincere authentic evangelism." Those who identify themselves with, and support, the ecumenical evangelism of "Father" Graham are sinning against the Lord. The words of Jehu to Jehoshaphat are in order here (II Chronicles 19:2): "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? Therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord." There is a curse that rests upon compromise!
***
June, 1972 - The Consequence of Compromise! In a press conference, Wednesday morning, June 7, and in his address that evening to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Philadelphia, Billy Graham declared his full support of President Nixon’s peaceful coexistence program with the Communists. Praising his visits to Peking and Moscow, Graham said: "I am really thrilled with Nixon for going." He further indicated that he believed God’s spirit that is moving in the world led the President to attend a Baptist worship service during a visit to Russia. Mr. Graham is destitute of discernment when he praises the President for acts of betrayal without parallel in the history of our nation. There is a curse that rests upon coexistence with Communism! Within a few short months we have witnessed the betrayal of Free China; the betrayal of our P.0.W. ‘s; the sell-out of our National security interests; and not the least, the dastardly betrayal of true Christians behind the iron curtain. The Moscow Baptist "Showcase" in which the President "worshipped" is a center for the operation of the Soviet secret police (KGB). Yet Mr. Graham has nothing but praise for such a program! There is a moral and spiritual blindness that inevitably accompanies the sin of compromise. And of compromisers, Billy Graham is by far the champion.
***
July, 1972 -- Flight Into Fantasy! The Bible-Science Association for June 1972 reported the appearance of Billy Graham on the Dick Cavett show, March 7, 1972. Said Mr. Graham: "I think that most of the so-called Fundamentalists today would recognize that the earth is millions of years old. I don’t think anybody holds to that today (the belief that the earth is no more than 6,000 years old - Ed. note)... .not any sane thinking Fundamentalist would believe that any longer...I personlly believe it has been millions of years. I think it can be scientifically proven, and I think that between the first and second verses of the first chapter of Genesis is plenty of room for all these millions of years." He said the Genesis account could be 500,000 years ago. So speaketh the man who as far back as 1954 repudiated Fundamentalism, declaring himself to he a Conservative-Liberal. What right have you, Mr. Graham, to speak for Fundamentalists, since you are not one of them. Speak for the Wheaton College advocates of the theistic evolution, if you will; speak for the New Evangelical compromisers, of whom you are one, who believe all this clap-trap about threshold evolution, but please, please, Mr. Graham, let Bible-believing Fundamentalists speak for themselves. And just where, by the way, is your "scientific proof"?
***
August, 1972 -- The Hem of the Harlot! Minneapolis (RN5) - Evangelist Billy Graham said here he welcomes Roman Catholic participation in Key 73, the massive interdenominational effort planned next year. "We all ought to get behind it," Graham said. Graham, who recalled that he was one of the original organizers of Key 73, along with Carl Henry, said his evangelistic association will cooperate "100 percent" in the effort. Comment: Nothing but the judgment of God can rest upon this unholy alliance!
***
October, 1972 - In an advertisement in the Shreveport Times, March 7, 1965, appeared a Western Union Telegram dated March 4, 1965 from Atlanta, GA., addressed to Rev. George Pearce of the First Methodist Church of Shreveport: "Congratulations on selecting Bishop Kennedy to conduct your evangelistic effort Mission of Love with Bill Mann leading the music. We know and respect these men very highly. May God give you a time of spiritual renewal." It was signed: "Billy Graham and Team. Gerald Kennedy is the bishop of the Methodist Church in the Los Angeles area, and was chairman of Graham’s 1963 Los Angeles campaign. In his book, Gods Good News, Bishop Kennedy says: "I believe the testimony of the New Testament taken as a whole is against the doctrine of the Deity of Jesus. " In his book, The Christian and His America, he says: "One of my favorite pulpits is a Unitarian Church in Pennsylvania." The San Francisco Examiner, May 6, 1961, quoted Kennedy: "I’m for Bishop Pike 99% of the time.. .1 don’t think such theological issues as the Virgin Birth of Christ are the central, important things." Read II John 7-11 Graham’s endorsement of Kennedy makes him a partaker of this blasphemer’s evil deeds. Where does this place Graham’s supporters? In exactly the same camp - the camp of antichrist!
***
January, 1973 - Ecumenical Evangelism is being prompted with a vengeance this year through the mass movement known as Key ‘73. It was spawned by an editorial from the pen of Carl Henry in Christianity Today, June 1967, under the significant and revealing title, "Somehow, Let’s Get Together.’ It was a plea for dramatic new dimensions of fellowship across denominational lines.’ The editorial led to a consultation of some 42 interested church leaders in September of 1967. As might be expected, since the expenses for this consultation were underwritten by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, the champion of compromise and confusion himself (B.G.) is all for it. In a news item coming out of Minneapolis appears the following: "Evangelist Billy Graham said here he welcomes Roman Catholic participation in Key 73, the massive interdenominational evangelism effort planned next year. ‘We all ought to get behind it,’ Graham said.. ..Graham, who recalled that he was one of the original organizers of Key ‘73 along with Carl Henry, said his evangelistic association will cooperate ‘100 percent’ in the effort." Getting together "somehow" is not the Bible basis for fellowship and cooperation among Christians! It is the Devil’s own program and has the judgment of God upon it.
***
January, 1973 - In one of his syndicated question and answer columns, Billy Graham, the champion of compromise and confusion, offers the following advice: "Question - As a Roman Catholic, my wife and I were shocked when St. Christopher was discredited. We find that many of the old confidences are being shaken in the church today. Where will it all stop? Answer - The Bible presents the church as a dynamic force that moves on to ultimate perfection.. .Above all, don’t pull out of the church! Stay in it, stay close to the Lord, and use these experiences as an opportunity to help your church be what God intends and the world needs." The apostate, antichrist Church of Rome is moving on toward ultimate perdition, not perfection! The command of God’s Word is "Come out!" - not stay in. See Revelation 18:4. To follow the advice of Billy Graham is to pursue a pathway of disobedience to the authority of the Word of God!
***
February, 1973 - Deception in the Dialogue! The Anti-Defamation League, in its December 1967 bulletin had an article entitled, "My Conversation with Billy Graham," by Rabbi Arthur Gilbert, who was an observer at the 1966 Berlin Congress on Evangelism. The interview took place at Graham’s home in Montreat, where Rabbi Gilbert was a guest. "Billy said that as he grew in sensitivity his own method of handling Jews attending his crusades had changed. When Jews step forward at his crusades, he makes no special missionary appeal for their conversion." Dr. Graham was quoted: "It is wrong to presume that the sufferings of the Jews are a consequence alone of their denial of Jesus." How glibly does the double-tongued devotee of the dialogue remove the stigma of guilt from the nation that rejected its Messiah in the full light of the truth! "All men are in need of God’s forgiveness. Jews are under no special guilt and, in fact, the Church stands in the same need of God’s forgiveness." How about that? Read Matthew 27:25! Graham said: "Christ is the way to God’s forgiving love, but it ill behooves me to judge Jews as a people lost to salvation. "Rabbi Gilbert testified: I left Montreat satisfied that our dialogue would continue, encouraged that evangelicals are no longer inaccessible. I left Montreat respectful of Christianity - and strengthened in my Judaism." And, we might add, unconverted and on his way to hell. How in the name of common sense can Graham evangelize Jews when he doesn’t believe that they are lost and need to be converted to Christ?
***
May, 1973 - The origin of "Key ‘73" is the pit of hell. That is the source from which doctrinal compromise and confusion always comes. God is not the author of confusion (I Corinthians 14:33): the Devil is. In June, 1967, Dr. Carl Henry wrote an editorial in Christianity Today , entitled "Somehow, Let’s Get Together." It was the presentation of a plea for "dramatic new dimensions of fellowship across denominational lines." As a result of this editorial a consultation of some forty-two interested church leaders was held in the Key Bridge Motor Hotel at Arlington, Va., in September of that same year. Expenses for this gathering were underwritten by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, as we might have expected. This and three subsequent consultations, led to the launching of ‘Key ‘73.’ Its Executive Director is Dr. Ted Raedeke of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. The honorary chairman is - well, guess who? None other than the champion of compromise and confusion himself, Billy, the "Bridge-Builder, Graham! Without a doubt, he is the Master Bridge-Builder of the New Evangelical movement.
* * *
June, 1973 -- The Gastonian Gazette, November 22, 1967, reportinq the appearance of Billy Graham at Belmont Abbey, a Roman Catholic institution, for the purpose of receiving an honorary doctorate degree, quoted him as saying he knew of no greater honor a North Carolina preacher, reared just a few miles from here (Charlotte) could have than to be presented with this degree. I’m not sure hut what this could start me being called ‘Father Graham,’ he facetiously added....The gospel that built this school and the gospel that brings me here tonight is still the way to salvation. How’s that for a sell-out to Satan! Billy Graham has travelled so far down the road to Rome that he no longer knows what the Gospel really is! If Graham’s gospel is the same gospel as that of the Roman Catholic gospel, then Graham’s gospel is not the genuine Gospel of the Grace of God. Let’s face it! If the highest honor he could have is from the hands of Papal puppets, he thus identifies himself as an emissary of Satan, and not of the Lord. Our Lord said, "I receive not honour from men.. .How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God Only?" (John 5:41,45) It is absolutely impossible for one who receives honor at the hands of Rome to be anything other than an apostate from the truth!
***
June, 1973 - It is abundantly evident that the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham offers no threat to the apostate doctrines of the Church of Rome. Never once has he been heard to expose and condemn "The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth" (Revelation 17:5). Indeed, the honors he has received and the high favor in which he is held by Rome, indicate clearly that he himself is well down the road to becoming a Papal puppet. The Daily Journal, International Falls, Minnesota, October 29, 1963, contained this revealing news item: ‘If Pope Paul asked me to go out and preach the gospel as I see it, I would do it,’ Billy Graham told 750 Protestant ministers in New York recently. The evangelist recalled that at a recent crusade in Sao Paulo, Brazil, the Roman Catholic bishop stood beside him and blessed the converts as they came forward. "Where is the true servant of Christ who would take his orders from the Pope of Rome? Where is the faithful messenger of the grace of God who would even think of submitting his converts to the blessing of a Roman bishop? Yet, Billy the "Bridge-Builder," will sell his birthright for a mess of Papal pottage.
***
January, 1974 - The following is part of a letter addressed by the pastor to the director of a certain Mission who expressed reluctance to pass judgment upon evangelist Billy Graham: "Do you believe that a man so completely confirmed in a course of compromise as is Billy Graham, is worthy of the confidence of~the Lord’s people? Can a man commit so serious a sin as that which he has practised over a period of many years without forfeiting the seal of God’s blessing upon his ministry? Is such an one worthy of recognition as a servant of God? Is he not rather serving the interests of Satan? Disobedience to the revealed will of God as set forth in His holy Word is deadly, and particularly so when it is deliberate. Ought we not to warn people against the baneful influence of a man so deadly dangerous? Shall we sit by in complacency while he and his followers dance the dance of death around the golden calf of ecumenical evangelism? Shall we not cry out, like Moses, against the wickedness of such worship? If it be in the area of motive, I can understand your reluctance to pass judgment, for no man knows the motives in another’s heart. But with an open Bible before us, we have not only the right, but the responsibility to pass judgment upon the conduct of men who walk contrary to the Word and will of God. Billy Graham may mouth "gospel" words, but when a man compromises the message he proclaims, the "truth of the Gospel" is sacrificed. Galatians 2:3-5"
***
April, 1974 - The Convenience and Comfort of Compromise! In 1948 Billy Graham accurately stated that one of the ‘gravest menaces" facing Christianity is Roman catholicism. These words are as true today as when he uttered them. The bible has not changed, but Billy graham has. With his finger upon the public pulse, chameleon-like, the champion of compromise and confusion changes color with the crowd. On October 21, 1973, he stated: "This past week I preached in a great Catholic Cathedral. As I sat there going through the mass, that was a very beautiful thing. And certainly straight and clear in the gospel that I believe...." In just what "gospel" do you believe, Mr. Graham? Do you not know that the idolatrous mass, in its oft repeated offering of the body of Christ, is a blasphemous denial of the all-sufficient, once-for all sacrifice of the Son of God in the shedding of His precious blood upon the cross of Calvary? Myriads of martyrs died because they would not go "a massing," yet Mr. Graham can speak of attending mass, and enjoying it, without any compunction of conscience. If Graham’s gospel is the same gospel as that of the Roman Catholic gospel, then Graham’s gospel is not the genuine Gospel of the grace of God. Let’s face it! If unconverted Catholics are received and welcomed by Graham as his brothers, he cannot and must not be given recognition as a brother by Bible-believing fundamentalists. He does not belong in the same family.
***
April, 1974 - In an open letter, published by The Radio Gospel Fellowship, P.O. Box 72, Denver, Colorado, Billy Graham said: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture, but rather, the ground of our fellowship is to be the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. I, myself, hold to the verbal inspiration view-point; I think any other position is fraught with danger. However, many of the. leading evangelicals, and even fundamentalists when pinned down, do not hold to the verbal inspiration of Scripture. I have accepted my position by faith! Yet I know devout men. of God who believe in the virgin birth, the atonement, the resurrection and have strong evangelistic zeal and passion who do not hold to this particular theory of inspiration. "To regard the doctrine of verbal inerrancy as a mere matter of viewpoint; to place it in the category of one among many equally valid theories of inspiration, is to reject the authority of the Word of God as completely as those who deny it outright. To remove Christian fellowship from the basis of an inerrant Bible is to destroy the very foundation of faith. If we do not have an inerrant Bible, what authority have we for believing any of the other evangelical doctrines such as the virgin birth, absolute Deity, Substitutionary blood atonement, and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ? It is evident that Mr. Graham’s faith is not a factual faith, but an ethereal fanciful faith patterned after the relative concept of Karl Barth.
***
May, 1974 - Billy’s Betrayal! The United Church Observer of July 1, 1966, carried an article in which the evangelist was asked to submit answers to 26 provocative questions, one of which was on the Virgin Birth. Question: "Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin Birth - not just as a symbol of the incarnation or of Christ’s divinity as an historic event is necessary for personal salvation? Answer: "While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation. " This answer sounds like the answer of a man with mush in his mouth! On the subject of the Word of God, Question: "Do you believe that we who teach that Christ is the word of God and that the Bible bears witness to God’s revelation in him - but that the Bible is full of parable, myth, allegory and is often quite unhistoric and inexact - are false teachers? Answer: Unanswered. Any man who will not speak out in defense of an inerrant Bible is a traitor to the Truth!
***
July, 1974 -- The testimony of Japeth Perez who at the age of 14 went forward in the Billy Graham New York campaign of 1957: "Since Billy Graham sent me to the Catholic Church, I was under the impression that this was the right church. By the end of 1958, after having studied the catechism of the Catholic Church, and being convinced the Catholic Church was true, I had made my first Communion (one of the Sacraments of the Catholic Church). What did I gain from the Billy Graham Crusade? I gained about one year and a half in darkness and ignorance of the Bible, because Billy Graham sent me to the Catholic church." By the grace of God, through a faithful witness to the truth, this dear young man was ultimately delivered from the darkness and bondage of Romanism into which Graham’s influence had brought him. Buy what about the great number of those whom he has sent back into this Satanic system of spiritual slavery, never to come to a knowledge of the truth as it is in Christ Jesus? It is a terrible tragedy of tremendous proportion! How in the name of all that is holy can Mr. Graham justify his wicked and adulterous flirtations with the hierarchical harlot of Rome? If a man profess to have fellowship with God, and walks in darkness, he lies and does not the truth!
***
August, 1974 - In a letter to Mr. Steve West, chairman of the committee for the showing of the most recent Billy Graham film in Orlando, the pastor wrote: "Greetings in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let me thank you for the courtesy of your invitation to be present at the showing of the Billy Graham motion picture, Time To Run. I must hasten to add, however, that I will not be present since by conviction I have never been able to endorse the ecumenical evangelism of Mr. Graham in any way, shape or form. For the past quarter of a century, in a ministry dedicated to upholding the authority of the Word of God, I have exposed the hypocritical compromise and wicked disobedience of this dangerous man, and have warned the people under my influence not to endorse or support his ministry. Under separate cover I will forward to you mimeographed material which will better enable you to understand my position with reference to Billy Graham and the issue of ecclesiastical separation. Should you wish to talk with me personally about this matter, I will indeed be happy to sit down with you over an open Bible at a time and place of your convenience. I am sincerely yours, In Jesus’ Precious Name, (signed) the pastor.
At the recent Lausanne Congress on ecumenical evangelism, Billy Graham said: "We have had only the warmest relations with the World Council of Churches," Getting hotter all the time, Billy!
***
September, 1974 - The Stars Are Shining - but .not for Jesus! A new developing geographical center appears to be the Reno-Tahoe area of gambling and night-clubs, where musical favorites, who frequently appear on the Billy Graham platform, have been making the rounds. Among them are: Norma Zimmer, Johnny Cash, Burl Ives, Dale Evans, Roy Rogers, Pat Boone - all of them entertainers with a Hollywood halo, who specialize in "sacrificial suffering for Christ’s sake." (New Evangelical style) in the midst of the "one-armed bandits and half naked women in these gambling hell-holes. All of this enhances the glamour of their "witness for Christ" on the Graham "evangelistic" programs.
***
September, 1974 - One of the main speakers at Billy Graham’s recent Congress on Evangelism in Lausanne,. Switzerland, was Malcolm Muggeridge, the dean of British columnists and noted TV personality. In his book, Jesus Rediscovered, published in 1969, Muggeridge wrote: "To imagine this deity having a son in any particular sense, and this son to have been born of a virgin, and to have lived on earth for thirty years or so as a man; then to have died and risen from the dead, is, as far as I am concerned, beyond credibility." According to Christianity Today, August 30, 1974, Graham’s honored friend was one of the few to receive a standing ovation. How did this apostate from Christianity get to appear on a platform supposedly dedicated to evangelism? This is the tragic consequence of the cursed compromise of a counterfeit Christianity!
***
October, 1974 -- Damnably Deceitful! Missionary Bill Standridge reports on the International Congress on World Evangelism, held in Lausanne, Switzerland, July 16-25, 1974, in the most recent issue of Focus On Missions: "The inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures was a problem for many. Is the Bible really, in every page, the infallible and inerrant Word of God? In his introductory message to the Congress, Evangelist Billy Graham, honorary president and announced sponsor of the 10-day get-together, said that although he could not understand it, ‘it (the Bible) is taken by the Holy Spirit and made inerrant to my spirit.’" What is this but the Barthian concept of inspiration, pure and simple! According to Karl Barth the Bible is inspired only as it is inspiring, which is a shrewd and subtle way of saying that the actual words of Scripture are not the very words of God. H.R. Macintosh, interpreting Barthianism at this point says, "In other words revelation is revelation only when by the Spirit it ‘gets through’ to man." Are we to understand that Graham in the making of this statement is now joining Barth in his rejection of the Bible as an objective revelation of God to man? If not, why is he now using the language of Neo-Orthodoxy? As he persistently pursues his tragic course of compromise, he makes one concession after another to the diabolic liberalism of Neo-Orthodoxy. What will the end thereof be?
***
May, 1975 - The latest Billy Graham film, produced by his movie firm, World Wide Pictures, depicts the life of a noted female tongues advocate. It tells the story of Corrie Ten Boom, a woman preacher who advocates speaking in tongues and who ridicules the imminent return of Christ. In fact, she describes those who believe in the rapture of the church as "the false teachers Jesus was warning us to expect in the latter days." (Logus Journal November-December, 1974, p. 20) To play her part ,in this film, the Graham film company selected a Hollywood actress, Julie Harris. The Indianapolis Star quotes her as saying: "I was sent to Sunday School in the Episcopal Church and I was confirmed in the Episcopal Church, and never went back." This Sunday School drop-out gave her own definition of what is religious: "If it tells the truth about life and the human heart, if it speaks of men’s failings and also their grandeur and hope, then it is religious. David E. Anderson in a UPI release called Miss Harris’ faith less than conventional. "I expected to find miracles in the church. Now I really feel that I found God in the theater. "How tragic are the consequences of compromise!
***
May, 1975 - Realignment - New Evangelical Style! In Decision Magazine for November 1974, Billy Graham tells how he thinks God is reshuffling the forces: "In these last days the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing among the people of God. He is regrouping His people. What do I mean by regrouping? Up to now we were grouped in different ways, by denominations, by races, by types. Today the Holy Spirit is using a different basis. He is regrouping in two categories: those who love one another and those who do not love one another. He is doing it not by definition of our doctrine but by the way we live together and love one another." We wish that the next time Mr. Graham reads his Bible, he does it with his eyes open. He might just come across a passage such as Romans 16:17-18, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them!" The farther the New Evangelicals get from the authority of the Word of God, the more emphasis they place upon the "Holy Spirit" and "love."
***
June, 1975 - Leslie Weatherhead, Methodist minister for many years in London’s City Temple, presents his concept of a crank in his book The Manner of the Resurrection. On page 13 he says: "I have yet to meet the minister of a large church who has not got in his congregation the typical crank. This man believes that Christ may return tomorrow from a heaven in the sky - presumably in Eastern robes, since a blue suit and bowler hat would not fit the preconceived picture - and take the righteous - namely all those who think like the crank - to eternal bliss, consigning the remainder to an ever-blazing hell. Another man believes that though he does not explain which words are so inspired - Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, King James Version in the English, the Revised Version, or Revised Standard Version, or Dr. Moffit or Mr. J.B. Phillips! One crank asks me if I am ‘saved’ and another whether I have been ‘washed in the blood.’" This Bible-denying, Christ rejecting scoffer was identified with Graham in his London campaign. Concerning Graham he said: "He has never once, to my knowledge, lifted his voice or pen to tell us that in his nostrils our theology stinks." Shame on you, Mr. Graham!
***
June, 1975 - The Battle For The Bible! "In this crisis the Word of God comes to our aid. Let a man once be convinced of the truth and supreme importance of Verbal Inspiration, and he will be able to resist all temptations to compromise it. He will not only refuse to yield up one jot or tittle of it but wit), also refuse to give the hand of fellowship to those who deny all or any part of Verbal Inspiration; for that would make the denial of it a matter of little importance. Knowing that Christians need the precious doctrine of verbal inspiration, he will not jeopardize their spiritual welfare by asking them to receive as their spiritual advisors those who deny either the truth or the importance of it.. .He maintains friendly relations with all who are searching for the truth, searching for it in God’s Word, but cannot make common cause with men who set out to ravage and despoil God’s Word. He absolutely refuses to bid them Godspeed." These worthy words from the pen of Theodore Engelder were written several years before Billy Graham was catapulted to popularity in the ecclesiastical world, yet one might well think they were written for his benefit. In his dastardly compromise Graham declared some thirteen years ago that he no longer believed that the doctrine of inerrancy should be the ground of Christian fellowship.
***
July, 1975 - Malcolm Muggeridge received a standing ovation at the 1974 Graham Lausanne Conference. In his book, Jesus Rediscovered, Muggeridge states: "Whether it happened as described in the Gospel narrative, and endlessly repeated by Christian apologists, is another question. In any case, what does it matter? I even prefer to suppose that some body-snatcher, accustomed to hanging about Golgotha to pick up anything that might be going, heard in his dim-witted way that the King of the Jews was up for execution. Good! He thinks: there are bound to be pickings there. So he waits till the job is done, finds out where the corpse has been laid, drags the stone away and then making sure that no one is watching, decamps with the body." Such is this blasphemer’s explanation of the resurrection of Christ. It is serious sin indeed, utter wickedness, for Graham to include this Christ-rejecter in a program of "evangelism," He needs to be sharply rebuked!
***
December, 1975 - Dr. Charles Woodbridge, in his book, Biblical Separation, writes:
"Ecumenical evangelism came to Los Angeles. A Billy Graham Crusade was launched (1963). The honorary chairman was Bishop Gerald F. Kennedy of the Methodist Church, who openly denied the deity of Christ. On the platform was a Bible teacher, well-known in southern California. He was a member of the sponsoring committee of the Crusade, apparently amicably close to the Methodist blasphemer. What was he doing there in the first place? Years later (in 1968) he wrote that he was willing to do the same thing over again. Has he forgotten Romans 16:17 and Titus 3:10? who was this man? You may have heard his name. You may even listen avidly to his radio Bible teaching. He was none other than Dr. J. Vernon McGee." Says Dr. Archer Weniger: "Dr. J. Vernon McGee was quite frank about his feelings about Kennedy as he recalls serving with him on the Executive Committee for the Los Angeles Crusade: "Now I’m not going to fight that sort of thing. I didn’t elect Bishop Kennedy; I voted against him; I am opposed to him; I disagree with him; he disagrees with me; I never met him. He sits on one side of the committee and I sit on the other side. He goes out that door; I go out this door. "That’s not brotherly,’ you say. Well, he’s not my brother." Why then, Dr. McGee, did you sit on the same platform with him? Why did you serve on the same committee?
***
January, 1976 C- From The New Neutralism, by Dr. William E. Ashbrook, pages 40-41:
"Considering the fact that the organization (Youth For Christ) came into being under the inspiration and direction of Billy Graham, and other young men of like mind who were associated with him, it was almost inevitable that its convictions, whatever they may have been in the earlier days, would wane with the Graham defection from fundamentalism. The Youth For Christ wagon is inextricably hitched to the Billy Graham star as anyone who will peruse the pages of the Youth For Christ Magazine, can quickly discover. Consequently its programs have become increasingly shallow, lacking in Biblical discernment, and geared to the glamour methods of the Graham Crusades. Young people trained in its school of thought will almost inevitably turn against Sound fundamental churches which teach separation from apostasy. Such ideas are ‘narrow’ and ‘bigoted’ in the minds of Youth For Christ leaders by and large. We have seen a good many Youth For Christ leaders in action, and so far as their professional directors are concerned, we have yet to meet the first one who would commend the position of a sound, fundamental and separated local church to his constituency. Because of the very inclusive nature of the YFC program, this could not be done. One of the surest and quickest ways for a fundamental pastor to weaken the convictions and stand of his young people is to interest them in the Youth For Christ programs of inclusivism and hoop-a-la in things religious.
***
August, 1976 - The following news item appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/6/76: Leaders of the Roman Catholic, Episcopal and Lutheran churches in America yesterday joined in predicting the end of the ‘lovers quarrel’ that has separated the Christian churches since the 16th century. The >ecumenical program’ of the International Eucharistic Congress in Convention Hall was marked by expressions of unity, conciliation and openness to change. William Cardinal Baum, archbishop of Washington, D.C., said that more progress toward unification of Christian churches had been made in the past ten years than at any time since the Reformation. ‘We have set in motion a process which I think is irreversible, ‘ Cardinal Baum. The Rev. Dr. Robert J. Marshall, president of the Lutheran Church in America, told several thousand people that >we now will not rest content with keeping our heritage separate. We begin to see the glimmer of a new day.’" The Reformation is being reversed. The harlot church of the Antichrist is being built. (The deepening apostasy is approaching a climax.) And one of the chief contributors to this cursed compromise is Billy Graham. Said Cuthbert Allen (Roman Catholic): "Knowing the tremendous influence of Billy Graham among Protestants, I would state that he could bring Catholics and Protestants together in a healthy ecumenic spirit."
***
September, 1976 - Billy, the Bridge-Builder, is still in the business of building bridges back to Rome. A drive-in theater, Gainesville, Florida, which formerly featured X-rated movies for the moral degenerates in that area has been purchased and refurbished by St. Madelaine Sophie Parish of High Springs. The Roman Catholic church is under contract with Billy Graham’s World Wide Pictures to show "exclusively religious pictures" at the "Family Drive-In" Proceeds will go to the parish building fund. It is abundantly evident that the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham offers no threat to the apostate doctrines of the Roman hierarchy. The puppets of the Papacy are willing to use him, and he is willing to be used by them for the promotion of Papal power and influence. If you are a supporter of this champion of compromise and confusion, you are a participant in his evil deeds (II John 11) and will be held accountable by Almighty God in the day of judgment.
***
October, 1976 - The Perils of Peale’s Popularity! Dr. Norman Vincent Peale whose popularity has been enhanced by the endorsement of Billy Graham, was asked byModern Maturity magazine, December-January, 1975-76, "Does the Reformed Church believe people are inherently good or bad?" He replied: "They are inherently good -- the bad reactions aren’t basic. Every human being is a child of God and has more good in him than evil - but circumstances and associates can step up the bad and reduce the good. I’ve got great faith in the essential fairness and decency -- you may say goodness -- of the human being.@ Concerning Christ, he said, AI like to describe Him as... the nearest thing to God.. ..A In one breath this blasphemer denies the total depravity of the human race, endorses the universal Fatherhood of God -- brotherhood of man concept, and rejects the absolute Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the man of whom Billy Graham, at a National Council of Churches luncheon, December 6, 1966, said: AI don’t know anyone who has done more for the kingdom of God than Norman and Ruth Peale, or have meant any more in my life -- the encouragement they have given me.@
***
October, 1976 - Hail Mary! The ecumenical evangelist, Billy Graham, is quoted in the Southern Cross, a Catholic paper: "I think that Protestants, in reaction to the Catholic position, have made far too little of Mary. Mary was the most remarkable and most blessed of all women." A pronouncement of this nature will certainly not hurt his image with Romanists who worship Mary as the Queen of Heaven and as the comediatrix with the Lord Jesus Christ. In the same interview he joined a growing list of New Evangelicals who look with favor upon the Pope as head of the universal church. He said: "There is a greater acceptance of the Pope among Protestants regarding his position as a religious leader." Is that so, Mr. Graham? Speak for yourself and your compromising New Evangelical crowd, but do not presume to speak for Bible-believing fundamentalists who regard the Pope as an agent of Satan from the pit of hell. If you and your compromising crowd wish to kiss the Pope’s feet and join the Romanists in their "Hail Marys," that is your prerogative. But please do not attempt to speak for those who tremble at the Word of God instead of trifling with it!
***
November, 1976 - Taking the Heat Out of Hell! In Decision magazine, April, 1972, Billy Graham, referring to the rich man in hades said: "Could it be that the fire Jesus talked about is an eternal search for God that is never quenched? Is that what it means? That indeed would be Hell. I wouldn’t take a chance on it, Mr. Graham!
***
January, 1976 - BLATANT BLASPHEMY! Christianity Today, August 18, 1967, sets forth the following revelation about English Churchman, Canon Hugh Montifiore: Jesus might have been a homosexual, suggests the vicar of Cambridge University’s main church. Canon Hugh Montifiore told a Modern Churchmen’s Conference at Oxford that Jesus need not have been hindered from marriage by lack of money or possible mates. "Women were his friends, but it is men he is said to have loved,’ the vicar added." What a viciously filthy implication to cast upon the spotless soul of the Son of God! Would you believe that this religious reprobate was Advisor for the Cambridge Billy Graham Television Crusade in England? Think you, my friend, that God will not hold Mr. Graham responsible for permitting himself to be identified with a man of the caliber of the afore-mentioned Canon? He most surely will! And He will hold you responsible too, if you support the ministry of this champion of compromise and confusion. Let us by the grace of God refuse fellowship to professed believers who permit themselves to be found in fellowship with such blatant unbelief! See II John 6-11.
***
January, 1977 -- THE CURSED CONSEQUENCE OF COMPROMISE! In 1948 Billy Graham accurately stated that one of the "gravest menaces" facing Christianity is Roman Catholicism. These words are as true today as when he uttered them. The Bible has not changed, but Billy Graham has. With his finger upon the public pulse, chameleon-like, the champion of compromise and confusion changes color with the crowd.. On October 21, 1973, he stated: ‘This past week I preached in a great Catholic Cathedral. As I sat there going through the mass, that was a very beautiful thing. And certainly straight and clear in the gospel that I believe... "In just what ‘gospel’ do you believe, Mr. Graham? Do you not know that the idolatrous mass, in its oft-repeated offering of the body of Christ, is a blasphemous denial of the all-sufficient, once-for-all sacrifice of the Son of God in the shedding of His precious blood upon the cross of Calvary? Myriads of martyrs died at the stake because they would not go "a massing," yet Mr. Graham can speak of attending mass, and enjoying it, without any compunction of conscience.
***
February, 1977 - POPULAR APPEAL! An Associated Press report out of Miami within the past month read as follows: "Evangelist Billy Graham says the Bible does not teach teetotaling so it’s all right for the Baptist President Elect Jimmy Carter to drink an occasional high-ball. "I do not believe that the Bible teaches tee-totalism. I can’t.. .Jesus drank wine. Jesus turned water into wine at the wedding feast,’ said Graham, in the Miami area for the Christmas holidays. That wasn’t grape juice as some of them try to claim. The Greek word is the same as it is used everywhere else far wine. Drunkenness is a sin.’ Graham said in an interview with the Miami Herald that he was a friend of Carter. Asked how much influence he might have now that there’s a fellow Baptist in the White House, Graham replied, ‘probably not very much.. .We’re friends, and I’ve spent several nights with him, and he was chairman of two of our crusades, and I’m very much for him.’" You had better do your homework on the subject of wine in the Bible, Mr. Graham! You could start with Proverbs 20:1 and 23:31-32!
***
March, 1977 - THE DEVIL’S ADVOCATE! According to an RNS dispatch from Urbane, Illinois, Billy Graham has called for a moratorium on controversy in three vital areas. It read as follows: "Billy Graham, the evangelist, urged here that evangelicals ‘accept unity in diversity’ and avoid divisiveness over such matters as Biblical inerrancy, charismatic phenomena, and political activism. " It would appear that Mr. Graham has very little regard for the inerrancy of the Bible. He would have us muzzle our mouths and take an unprotesting neutral stance in the face of the issue that is creating so great a stir within the New Evangelical camp. No, Mr. Graham, never will we as Bible-believing fundamentalists extend fellowship to any who repudiate and reject the total inerrancy of Holy Scripture, nor will we keep our mouths shut over so vital an issue. We will tell you to your face that in making such a statement you are guilty of incipient apostasy. You are playing the Devil’s Advocate!
***
June, 1977 - THE ROAD TO ROME! During the month of May, the twentieth century champion of compromise and confusion - Billy Graham - carried his ecumenical evangelism to the campus of Notre Dame University where he conducted a five-day crusade. Notre Dame means "Our Lady" and is the most prominent Roman Catholic University in America. According to the South Bend Tribune, May 9, 1977, he opened his press conference with "glowing accolades for Notre Dame PresidentRev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, of whom he has been a longtime admirer.’ The Press reported: "He said he would not get into an argument with holier-than-thou conservative fundamentalists, who insist that his crusades attract too broad-based a denominational group. "This religious renegade may not wish to have an argument, but he will get one from Bible-believing fundamentalists who insist upon the authority of God that he is committing spiritual adultery in his unholy union with the Harlot Bride of the Antichrist. If Graham’s gospel is the same gospel as that of the Roman Catholic gospel (as he so stated at Belmont Abbey in 1963), then Graham’s gospel is not the genuine Gospel of the Grace of God. Let’s face it! If Unconverted Catholics are received and welcomed by Graham as his brothers, he cannot and must not be given recognition as a brother by Bible believing fundamentalists. He does not belong in the same family.
***
January, 1978 - THE CALAMITOUS CONSEQUENCE of a compromised Christianity becomes fully evident in a recently reported statement made by the champion of ecumenical evangelism, Billy Graham, in McCall's Magazine, January, 1978, page 156: Graham confessed that he has taken a more modest view in his own role in God's plan for man. 'I used to play God,' he acknowledged, 'but I can't do that any more. I used to believe that pagans in far-off countries were lost - were going to hell - if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that,' he said. carefully. 'I believe that there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God - through nature, for instance- and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying ‘yes’ to God.’ In recent years Graham has shown particular affection for Jews. Like most Christian Fundamentalists, Graham once believed that Jews, too, were lost if they did not convert to Christianity. Today Graham is willing to leave that up to God." Did you ever hear such sickly sentimental slobber? As far back as 1954 he openly repudiated the term "Fundamentalist." What kind of evangelism is this, that would destroy the very basis for missionary enterprise?
***
April, 1978 - LAS VEGAS CONVERT! At the time of Billy Graham’s recent five-day Las Vegas crusade, he told a news conference that he was not in the city to criticize Las Vegas and its sometimes over-publicized life Style." And now comes a news clipping picturing this "man of the cloth" doing a burlesque, vaudeville type dance routine with Hollywood actor John Davidson and television personality Mike Douglas. Underneath the picture was the explanation: "Didn’t know that the Rev. Billy Graham tap-danced, did you? Neither did we. Here’s Billy with Mike Douglas and that nice young John Davidson, and they’re doing a little number during the Las Vegas taping of an upcoming Douglas show." One wonders just how he will be able to claim that he was misquoted in this escapade. Sin-blinded, worldly compromising evangelicals will see nothing at all wrong with such conduct. In the eyes of a holy God - and those who have any spiritual sense - this type of thing is an utter shame and disgrace! Isn’t it time that someone raised a voice of protest against the damnable hypocrisy of this great soul-winner?" We would not be at all surprised to find the whole New Evangelical camp tap-dancing in the near future. For what their hero does, they all soon do.
***
July, 1978 -- A FIRST-CLASS FARCE! "The crowds of people who throng to Billy Graham’s podium after a stirring sermon are more than just converts," according to a UPI dispatch, June 23, 1978. "Many are ‘ringers’ planted to bolster the impact,Human Behavior magazine said today. An article in the July issue reports the findings of a four-member team from Arizona State University that infiltrated the Graham organization during its 1974 visit to Phoenix. ‘Advance men show up in the community four to six weeks before the crusade starts to counsel and advise the locals,’ the magazine said. ‘By the time Graham arrives in town and makes his altar call, an army of 6,000 await with instructions at when to come forth at varying intervals to create the impression of a spontaneous mass outpouring, the article said. The report noted that ‘the acceptance of Christ,’ once regarded as a deeply personal experience, has been bureaucratized and routinized like the rest of today’s mass culture." We could not have summed it up better! This procedure dates back as far as his 1957 New York campaign. It borders on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
***
December, 1978 -- THE FOLLOWING LETTER was addressed by the pastor to the Florida West Coast Billy Graham Crusade: "Gentlemen - Over the past several weeks I have been receiving information with reference to the forthcoming Graham crusade to be held in Tampa next year. Let me advise you that as an independent fundamental Bible testimony we will have no part whatsoever in promoting the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham. Indeed, we shall do our utmost to oppose and expose the utter wickedness of the theological compromise in which he has involved himself over a period of almost three decades. Under separate cover we are sending to you mimeographed material which will better enable you to understand our position as a local church fellowship. We are forbidden by Scripture to pray God’s blessing upon your enterprise. To do so would be to participate in the serious sin of which Graham, through his compromise, is guilty, II John 10-11, of Billy Graham came to a climax on January 18, at another Presidential "Prayer" Breakfast. Under a photographic reproduction from the Philadelphia Daily News, the following appears: "Pray for Peace, Carter Urges - President Carter appeals for renewed prayers for peace during a Speech yesterday before the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington. The audience of 3,000 included Archbishop Fulton . Sheen, evangelist Billy Graham, the Rev. Illia Olav of the First Baptist Church of Moscow, and hundreds of government officials."
***
June, 1979 - GRAHAM THE GULLIBLE! Under this theme pastor Norman Pyle of River-dale, Georgia, writes: "Dr. Billy Graham probably does the best propaganda job for the communists of anyone in the world. He is of much greater value than the KGB churchmen who tour America and visit such places as Billy’s home church, First Baptist of Dallas, Texas. Dr. Graham started out thirty years ago as a fundamentalist who hated communism and was despised by the major denominations. Gradually he repudiated the fundamentalists and embraced the liberals. The liberals built his reputation and he built their churches. In the process he changed his mind on moral issues, communism and Catholicism. So this past year he visited Hungary and Poland and preached in Catholic churches. He praised the absolute freedom of worship under communism in those countries. And anyone who will believe that will believe anything." Hence, he refers to Graham as gullible, and gullible he is, as are they also who submit themselves to his influence. As the champion of compromise and confusion over the past three decades, he changed his own thinking and has caused the concept of truth to change in the thinking of those under his influence. Beware of Graham the gullible!
***
December, 1979 - THE TRAGIC TRUTH! The following is taken from the New York Times, February 26, 1975: "Dr. and Mrs. Henry P. Van Dusen, leaders in American theological life, swallowed overdoses of sleeping pills last month in the bedroom of their Princeton, New Jersey, home in an effort to carry out a suicide pact. Mrs. Van Dusen died. Dr. Van Dusen vomited up the pills and lingered for fifteen days before dying on February 13. Dr. Van Dusen, the former president of Union Theological Seminary (1945-63), and his wife both members of the Euthanasia Society and advocates of an individual’s right to terminate his or her own life - had entered into the pact rather than face the prospect of debilitating old age... Derek Van Dusen, one of the three surviving sons confirmed that his parents had agreed to the pact and said it had been raised as an option among family and friends for several years." Thus ended the life of a prominent "theologian" of the ultra-liberal breed who was supposed to have been "converted" during the Billy Graham 1957 New York campaign. His theological liberalism is nothing more or less than humanism clothed in clerical garb, and the philosophy of humanism leads to despair. This is a tragic truth!
***
January, 1980 - CURSED COOPERATION! The Los Angeles Times, August 18, 1979, gave this report: "Mohamed Ali and Rev. Billy Graham are considering joint appearances around the country to tell people of their common belief in love and healing, Graham says. ‘The two met for five hours over the weekend at the evangelist’s North Carolina home to discuss spiritual things,’ Graham said, adding, ‘Ali is a very serious-minded person. He is a fellow with a tremendous substance. He wants to be a healer in the world and he’s in a unique position to do a great deal of good. He’s accepted all over the world as a world citizen.’" Just what would Mr. Graham have in common with this black Muslim, the former Cassius Clay, who made his reputation as a professional boxer? Convicted as a draft dodger in the 1960’s by Texas courts., the U.S. Supreme Court (wouldn’t you know it?) overturned the decision of the lower courts on the grounds that he was a "minister of religion." More recently this "world citizen" hit the headlines when he fathered an illegitimate child and in the process ruptured his own marriage. Just what kind of "love would these two ministers of religion" - one a Muslim and the other a "Christian - proclaim? We would remind Mr. Graham that there is a verse in the Bible that says, "Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully." (Jeremiah 48:10)
***
January, 1980 - COUNTLESS THOUSANDS of martyrs could have escaped their agonizing deaths if only they had expressed belief in Rome’s wafer god. History tells us of one woman, already chained to the stake; a priest came to her urging her to say that the consecrated wafer in his hand was God, "If you do, we’ll let you go free." Indeed, there were thousands who availed themselves of this last opportunity; but not this woman and countless others like her. Said she: "Away with that idol! My God cannot became moldy." Shortly afterward she was with Christ. How is it, Mr. Graham, that without any apparent compunction of conscience you can participate in a Roman Catholic mass and call it a beautiful thing?
***
August, 1980 - PERILOUS PERVERSITY! It is abundantly evident that the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham offers no threat to the apostate doctrines of the Roman Church. Never once has he been heard to expose and condemn the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth. Indeed, the honors he has received and the high favor in which he is held by Rome, indicate clearly that he is well down the road to becoming a Papal puppet. The Daily Journal, International Falls, Minnesota, October 29, 1963, contained this revealing news item: "‘If Pope John asked me to go out and preach the gospel as I see it, I would do it,’ Billy Graham told 750 Protestant ministers in New York recently. The evangelist recalled at a recent crusade in Sao Paulo, Brazil, the Roman Catholic bishop stood beside him and blessed the converts as they came forward." Where is the true servant of Christ who would take his orders from the Pope of Rome? Where is the faithful messenger of the Gospel of the grace of God who would even think of submitting his converts to the blessing of a Roman bishop? It is unthinkable, utterly inconceivable, that a servant of the Lord should do so. Yet Billy - the "Bridge-builder" - will sell his birthright for a mess of Papal pottage. It is absolutely impossible for one who receives honour at the hands of Rome to be anything other than an apostate from the truth!
***
September, 1980 - THE PIT OF PERDITION is the source of the pernicious perversity so fully evident in the diabolic denial of the absolute deity of our Lord Jesus Christ by the late Bishop Gerald Kennedy in his book, God’s Good News, page 125 "I believe the testimony of the New Testament taken as a whole is against the doctrine of the deity of Jesus, although I think it bears overwhelming witness to the divinity of Jesus. Now if someone insists that the divinity of Jesus must be defined exactly, I would have to confess that I cannot do it for myself and it does not seem to me to be possible for others to do it. After all, what is divinity? Is it humanity at its best?" In another hook, he declared: "One of my favorite pulpits is a Unitarian church in Pennsylvania." It should he clear from these affirmations that the blaspheming bishop, while holding membership in the Methodist denomination, was a Unitarian at heart. This is the man who was appointed chairman of the Graham Crusade in Los Angeles in 1963, and whom Graham and his team endorsed in the following telegram sent to Shreveport, Louisiana, in 1965: "Congratulations on selecting Bishop Kennedy to conduct your evangelistic effort with Bill Mann leading the music. We know and respect these men very highly." Read II John 9-111
***
May, 1982 The menacing magnitude of apostasy in the ranks of the New Evangelicals is revealed by Kenneth L. Woodward in Newsweek, April 26, 1982: "The biggest battle being waged by the conservatives is a high—powered effort to expel from the evangelical movement any one who does not subscribe to the old fundamentalist theory (sic!) of Biblical inerrancy. According to this theory, which was developed by nineteenth-century Protestant theologians, the authority of the Bible rests solely on the belief that the original Scriptures were accurate in everything they affirmed - not only about matters of faith but about geography, science and history as well. In most scholarly circles (sic!) Biblical inerrancy is dismissed as a theory that may actually make it more difficult to understand the Bible. ‘Today the theory is largely a sociological password,’ says evangelical historian Grant Wacker, ‘something fundamentalists flash to find who’s on their side and who is not.’ Billy Graham, for one, clearly is not. ‘I believe the Bible is the inspired, authoritative word of God,’ Graham says, ‘but I don’t use the word ‘inerrant because it’s become a brittle, divisive word. I have certainly changed,’ Graham now acknowledges, and his example has enabled many other former fundamentalists to follow suite’
Such is the calamitous consequence of compromise! Twenty years ago this religious renegade rejected inerrancy as a ground of Christian fellowship, and now, two decades later, he no longer used the term. To regard the doctrine of verbal inerrancy as a mere matter of viewpoit; to place it in the category of one among many equally valid matter of viewpoint: to place it in the category of one among many equally valid theories of inspiration, is to reject the authority of the Word of God as completely as those who deny it outright. Beware of the perpetrators of such folly?
***
June, 1982 - Sell-out to Satan! The Baltimore Sun. (May 13, 1982) "Billy Graham has a God-given right to make a fool of himself in Moscow. He is doing a pretty good job of it while attending a propaganda show entitled, ‘the World Conference of Religious Workers for Saving the Sacred Gift of Life from Nuclear Catastrophe.’ The Billy Graham who is careful not to offend Soviet authorities seems a different man from the evangelist of the late 1940s who called Communism the work of the Devil." He now wears the halo of a hypocrite!
***
June, 1982 - Satan’s Stooge! A stooge is a stupid dolt who serves the foul and nefarious purposes of another. Under the headline, Billy Graham An Embarrassment To The U.S., George F. Will, writing in the St. Louis Globe Democrat, 5/14/82, gives due emphasis to the manner in which the Champion of Compromise and Confusion allowed himself to be exploited by the enemies of freedom. "When Vladimir Bukovsky, a Russian dissident, was being sent into exile, a KGB agent noted that the handcuffs on Bukovsky’s wrists were made in America. But handcuffs are not America’s most embarrassing export. Billy Graham’s sojourn as guest of the masters of the Gulag coincided with the anniversary of the Nazi surrender, so he said (according to the New York Times): ‘I want to remind you that the United States and the Soviet Union were allies at the time against a common enemy. Now we have another common enemy the possibility of nuclear war.’ Graham did not remind anyone that the Soviet Union and the Nazis began the war as allies, and their falling out was not a Soviet idea. But Graham’s delicacy is less interesting than his ‘common enemy’ formulation. The Kremlin is sponsoring take a deep breath - World Conference of Religious Workers for Saving the Sacred Gift of Life from Nuclear Catastrophe. The Kremlin’s audacious cynicism is wondrous. A ‘gift’ - from whom? Marx? And when did the Kremlin begin speaking of ‘the sacred’? This travesty, this exploitation of clergymen’s vanities and naivete’, is designed to strengthen the ‘peace movement’ but only in the West. Graham told one congregation that God ‘gives you the power to be a better worker, a more loyal citizen, because in Romans 13 we are told to obey the authorities.’ How is that for a message from America?"
***
June, 1982 -— The phoniest of the phony peace prophets is William F. Graham. Kenneth Briggs, writing in the New York Times, April 25, 1982, under the headline, Graham Blends Preaching With Appeal for Peace, says: "As the Rev. Billy Graham goes from one college rostrum to another in his current tour of New England, he often speaks of a personal ‘pilgrimage’ that has led him to regard the ending of the arms race as ‘my Number 1 social concern.’ This week he took his theme, ‘Peace in a Nuclear Age,’ to Yale, Harvard and Boston College and struck a responsive chord for his blend of Gospel preaching and general allusions to the need for disarmament. While the 63—year-old evangelist has been criticized by some listeners as giving too few specifics on the arms race, he has won wide approval from liberals and non—Christians." His propaganda for peace reflects a total departure from the prophetic perspective of the Bible. Shame on him!
***
June, 1982 - THE CHANGING CHAMELEON! From the Philadelphia Inquirer, May 16, 1982, comes the following report on Billy Graham. "‘In my family,’ he said, ‘we also wrestled with poverty if you go by today’s standards, except we did not know we were poor. We did not have sociologists, educators and newscasters constantly reminding us of how poor we were. We also had the problem of rats. The only difference between then and now was that we did not call the federal government to kill them. £ That was 1971. Eleven years later, in a paneled auditorium at Harvard University, Mr. Graham turned once again to the subject of poverty. ‘As a Christian I believe that God has a special concern for the poor of the world. I believe that God has a concern for things like peace, racism, the responsible use of the earth’s resources, economic and social justice, the use of power and the sacredness of human life.’ The change in Mr. Graham’s thinking has taken shape steadily since the mid to late ‘70s. He developed, he says, a broader understanding of the brotherhood of man. As a result, he has begun to speak out on a host of social issues — racial and religious tolerance, peace and social justice - calling for negotiated destruction of all nuclear weapons; urging not only compassion for the poor, but also fairer distribution of the world’s resources." Putting it bluntly, he has been suckered into a sell-out to the social gospel!
***
September, 1982 - The following letter was addressed by the pastor to the Rev. Jim Henry of the First Baptist Church under the date of September 17: "Dear Pastor Henry: Greetings in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ! In response to your letter soliciting my interest in the proposed Graham campaign for April 10-17, 1983, please be advised that it is absolutely impossible for me to be identified in any way, shape, or form with this religious renegade. Do you really believe that a man so completely confirmed in a wicked course of compromise as is Billy Graham, is worthy of the confidence of the Lord’s people? Can a man commit so serious a sin as that which he has practised over a period of many years without forfeiting the seal of God’s approval upon his ministry? Is such an one worthy of recognition as a servant of God? Is he not rather serving the interests of Satan? Disobedience to the revealed will of God as set forth in His holy Word is deadly, and particularly so when it is deliberate. Ought we not to warn people against the baneful influence of a man so deadly dangerous? Shall we sit by in complacency while he and his followers dance the dance of death around the golden calf of ecumenical evangelism? Shall we not cry out, like Moses, against the wickedness of such worship? With an open Bible before us, we have not only the right, but the responsibility to pass judgment upon the conduct of men who walk contrary to the Word and will of God. Billy Graham may mouth ‘gospel’ words, but when a man compromises the message he professes to preach, the ‘truth of the Gospel’ is sacrificed - Galatians 2:3-5. If I were you, Jim, I would resign from the chairmanship of the forthcoming Graham campaign immediately, get out of the Southern Baptist Convention, and take your stand on the side of truth. For the past thirty-three years I have opposed and exposed the doctrinal and moral bankruptcy of Graham’s ministry and by the grace of God will continue to do so. Under separate cover you will receive mimeographed material providing information and evidence as to why I believe Billy Graham to be an apostate from the truth. In Jesus’ Precious Name, (signed by the pastor)."
***
October, 1982 - THE BRIDGE BUILDERS! An amazing article written by Billy Graham appeared in the Saturday Evening Post for January-February, 1980. It was entitled, "The Pilgrim Pope: A Builder of Bridges." In the concluding paragraph he said: "During his visit to America, Pope John Paul II was indeed a bridge builder - and that is something our divided world desperately needs." He praised the Pope as a statesman, a pastor and an evangelist and claimed that the Pope was "pointing people to Christ." He called the Pope the "greatest religious leader of the modern world and one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century." According to a Religious News Service report for January 13, 1981, "Pope John Paul II was closeted for almost two hours with the Rev. Billy Graham, the world’s best known Protestant evangelist." It appears that Billy G. is bent, bound and determined to have the stage all set for the appearance of the antichrist when he comes upon the scene! On welcoming Graham the Pope said, "We are brothers." Later at a press conference Billy said, "We had a spiritual time." Can this possibly be the experience and statement of a true believer in the Lord Jesus Christ? Incidentally, the title Pontifex Maximus, by the ‘which the Romans designated their chief priest, means literally, the Chief Bridge—builder. Who better deserves this title than Graham himself, who has outdone even the Pope in the matter of building ecumenical bridges. As Bible believing fundamentalists we will have nothing to do with the ecumaniacal dreamers and their dreams. We absolutely refuse to cross those bridges of compromise with the enemies of God, Christ, and the Bible.
***
October, 1982 -- A TRAITOR TO THE TRUTH! That is what the champion of compromise and confusion, evangelist Billy Graham, became when he identified himself with the late Bishop James Pike, from whose pulpit in December of 1960 he addressed a standing—room only meeting sponsored by the layman’s unit of the National Council of Churches. The blaspheming Bishop pronounced the benediction. Happy felicitations and expressions of warm "Christian" love were exchanged between Pike and Graham. Remember this when Billy Graham comes to Orlando next April. To pursue union at the expense of truth is treason to the Lord Jesus. Fellowship with known and vital error is participation in sin! See II John 6-11.
***
October, 1982- MUSH IN HIS MOUTH! The United Church Observer, July 1, 1966, official organ of the United Church of Canada, had for its featured article. "Billy Graham answers26 Provocative Questions." One of the questions asked was; "Do you believe that we who teach that Christ is the word of God and that the Bible bears witness to God’s revelation in him - but that the Bible is full of parable, myth, allegory and is often quite unhistoric and inexact - are ‘false teachers’?" Unanswered. Come, now, Dr. Graham, why not spit the mush out of your mouth ad give us a clearcut answer! If you believe it is full of myth and allegory, that it is often unhistoric and inexact, say so. One way or another, Mr. Graham! We are reminded of the politician who was asked by a reporter, "Do you feel that you have influenced public opinion, sir?" "Not really," he said somewhat modestly. "Public opinion is like a mule I once owned. In order to keep up the appearance of being the driver, I watched the way he was going and followed closely." So it is with Billy Graham. He is an ecclesiastical politician par excellence! Had he answered the foregoing question "yes," he would have offended the apostate United Church of Canada. Had he answered "no," he would have ruffled the feathers of his evangelical supporters. To sin by silence when they should speak, reveals the cowardice of men! One may detect the same stench of hypocrisy in Graham’s neutrality as that which was so evident in the "we cannot tell" of the religious rogues of Jesus’ day, Matthew 21:23-27. When the authority of the Word of God is at stake, it is no time to be non-committal. Over against the wickedness of Graham’s compromise, let us stand firm in our witness "for the Word of God, and for the testi-mony of Jesus Christ"! (Revelation 1:9)
***
November, 1982 -- CHARLES CHINIQUY, who for twenty-five years was a priest in the Church of Rome, describes the state of his own soul as he witnesses the moral degradation of the priesthood about him: "There was, however, another thing which was still more overwhelming me. It was the terrible moral struggle in my soul from morning til night, and from night till morning, when the voice of my conscience was crying in my ears: ‘Do you not clearly see that your church is the devil’s church - that those priests, instead of being the Lamb’s priests, are the successors of the old Bacchus priests? Read your Bible a little more attentively, and see if this is not the reign of the great harlot, which is defiling the world with her abominations? How can you remain in such a church? How long will you remain in this sea of Sodom? Come out! Come out of Babylon, if you do not want to perish with her! How dare you meet your God, after you have so deceived yourself and the people as to believe and say that these are the representatives, the leaders, the priests of the church out of which there is no salvation.’" (Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, pages 431-32). And come out he finally did in protest against the abominable wickedness of the filthy harlot!
HAIL MARY! Evangelist Billy Graham was awarded an honorary Doctor of Human Letters degree by Belmont Abbey College, a Catholic institution, on Tuesday evening, November 21, 1967. "Now," said Graham to his predominantly Roman Catholic audience, "we can speak to one another, work with one another and be brothers to one another." He paid his respects to the "gospel of Christ" by saying, "That gospel has founded this school; that gospel has brought me here tonight." If Graham’s gospel is the same gospel as that of the Roman Catholic gospel, then Graham’s gospel is not the genuine gospel of the grace of God. Let’s face it! If unconverted Catholics are received and welcomed by Graham as his brothers, he cannot and must not be given recognition as a brother by Bible-believing fundamentalists. Graham needs to be converted just as Chiniquy was converted a century ago!
***
November, 1982 -- THEOLOGICAL TREACHERY! Following are the words of Dr. Leslie Weatherhead, from a sermon entitled, "Is Christianity the Only Way to God?": "Let me this morning be, at any rate, entirely honest. To my mind Christianity is certainly not the only way to God. Who can suppose that Billy Graham’s latest convert, a youngster with an imperfect knowledge of, and an untested faith in, Christianity, is in any sense ‘saved,’ to use the old-fashioned phrase, while a devout Buddhist or Hindu, who through a life-time has meditated on truth and reality and practices the highest way of life he knows, is, by a just, loving and holy God, excluded, or in any sense finally shut out from the fellowship of the saints?" This is the Methodist modernist who explained his participation in the London Graham Crusade by saying they would let Graham get the people into the churches and then we will teach them their doctrine. Graham will be held accountable for his participation in such theological treachery!
***
November, 1982 - A TRAGIC TESTIMONY! Chuck Templeton, once a silver-tongued evan-gelist and a platform mate to Billy Graham, - in 1946 they made a two—month preaching tour of Europe together — abandoned the ministry because he came to the place where he could no longer preach with conviction. Having forsaken his message and divorced his wife, it is lust as well that he did. Where did he begin to drift? The Globe Magazine, March 8, 1958, tells the story: "The decision to change my vocation was a slow and painful one. It was slow because my formal theological training had been superficial and came to maturity only after my years in Princeton, painful because I knew the decision would trouble my friends and some of those I had influenced. But over a period of years my views had evolved to the place where I was forced to make a decision. I could continue to preach, with mental reservations, or accept the alternative and leave the ministry. It became clear to me that I had no choice. My convictions are as to some aspects of Christian doctrine became diluted with doubt. Feeling as I do, I could not go on in the ministry. So I left." The commendable feature of Templeton’s action is that he was honest enough to leave the ministry. Robbed of his faith in the inerrancy of the Bible at an institution dedicated to the diabolic double standard of neo-orthodoxy, he refused to practise that dishonesty which has seared the consciences of multitudes of ministers. One could wish that Graham had shown the same honesty. In 1957 he admitted candidly that, at one period in the previous few years, he had become skeptical of the Bible to the extent that he had seriously considered quitting the ministry. Why didn’t he?
***
December, 1982 -- DIALECTICAL DECEIT! In Evangelism and the Church Today, Billy Graham stated: "The great theologians of today are Rudolph Bultmann, Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Reinhold Niebuhr, Paul Tillich, and Carl Henry." This declaration was made while Barth and Tillich were still on the earth scene. Neither of these men believed in a factual faith. Their theology was irrational to the very core. Reason and revelation are necessarily contradictory, the one of the other. No fact of history can be an object of faith for neo-orthodox theologians. In their system of thought faith must be separated from facts. "Faith if it proceeds from anything but a void, is unbelief," says Barth in his Epistle to the Romans, p.37. On page 99 he continues: "We do not demand belief in our faith." Time magazine, in its appraisal of Tillich, said "Faith, according to Tillich, is not belief in God, but ‘ultimate concern.’ Hence, an atheist is a believer, too... Doubt is an inevitable part of faith." With his high praise of those who advocate a dialectical theology, one remembers Graham’s candid confession to a group of fifty clergymen in 1957, that he had become skeptical of the Bible to the extent that he seriously considered quitting the ministry. He said: "I do not know whether any part of this is true. However, I overcame my skepticism with an act of faith, and I am not now quite the Biblical literalist that I am widely supposed to be." In plain words he is telling us that his faith is not a factual faith, but a faith that resembles that of Barth and Tillich - faith in a sentimental symbol.
***
December, 1982 -- ECUMENICAL EVIL! Mrs. William Lister Rogers, member of the apostate American Baptist Convention and President of the San Francisco Council of Churches at that time, was elected chairman of the Billy Graham San Francisco Bay Cities Crusade finance committee for the Cow Palace campaign in 1958. This female religionist was also the originator and chairman of the United Nations’ "Festival of Faith," which was held in the same location in 1955. The Outlook, official publication of the National Council of Churches, said of the festival: "They called God by different names, speaking to Him in different tongues, but the dream in their hearts was the same. High point of the prayer meeting was the recitation together of the Responsive Reading composed of sentences from the sacred books of the six faiths represented — Christian, Jewish, Moslem, Buddhist, Hindu and Confucian. The initial idea for the service came from Mrs. William Lister Rogers, council president." How can Graham possibly justify his identification with a participant in such blatant blasphemy? In no way should this woman have been permitted to serve in any capacity relating to an evangelistic campaign! In 1959, according to the UPI, Billy Graham shared his Madison Square Garden pulpit with Dr. Martin Luther King who, beside being a professional rabble-rouser, declared himself to be a product of the liberal school of theology, stating that he could not take the Bible literally. The late J. Edgar Hoover, Head of the FBI, referred to King as "the biggest liar in the U.S.A." King had a member of the Communist Party working on his staff - Hunter Pitts O’Dell. The God of the Bible is a holy God and will hold Graham responsible for his wicked compromise, as also those who support him in his evil deeds - II John 6-11.
***
December, 1982 -- THE CALAMITOUS CONSEQUENCE OF COMPROMISE! In his critique on Billy Graham, the Rev. Robert Dunzwiler stated: "In extending Christian recog-nition and approval to modernistic and neo—orthodox liberals, Dr. Graham is doing in estimable harm to the cause of Christ. By leading the mass of evangelical Christians into a Christ-dishonoring compromise with unbelief and unbelievers, Dr. Graham is bringing great grief to the heart of our Lord Jesus Christ. By effectively obliterating the clear line between true evangelical Christianity and that which is false, Dr. Graham is giving aid and comfort to Satan’s attempts to confuse, detract, disrupt, and destroy the Word of God, we will have no part in such wickedness!
***
December, 1982 -- A CURSED CONCEPT! In the Protestant Church Life, September 29, 1956, Billy Graham was quoted as follows: "We’re coming to New York, not to clean it up, but to get people to dedicate themselves to God, and then send them back to their own churches - Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish." Such has been the diabolic policy and wicked practice of the ecumenical evangelist for more that a quarter of a century. And the absolutely amazing element in the entire Satanic scheme is that the multitudes of evangelically minded people who follow him see nothing at all wrong with it!
***
January, 1983 -- A CANDID CHALLENGE! More than twenty years ago, at the time of his Buenos Aires campaign, an Open Letter was addressed to Billy Graham by Pastor Armando Di Pardo: "I have been constrained to set forth some of the reasons why many Christian workers who love the Lord and His Word, are not spiritually at liberty to back your Crusades. I have heard that the distinctive note of your preaching is ‘The Bible Says, ‘ and this encourages me to ask you to use the same method to make clear the following matters. In an ‘Open Letter,’ you qualified the Verbal Inspiration of the Bible, to which you said you adhered by faith - as ‘theory’ and ‘point of view.’ This contradicts innumerable passages of the Bible which present Verbal Inspiration as a basic and vital doctrine. Your statement fits completely into the field of religious ‘relativism,’ opens the door to a dangerous co-existence even with ‘modernists, ‘ and serves as a bridge for the false fellowship of ‘ecumenism. ‘ It is affirmed that you tell souls who profess Christ in your Crusades, that they can attend the ‘Church of their choice,’ whether that be Roman Catholic or ‘Modernist.’ I suppose that is why there are priests who pray for your campaigns, but what Biblical basis do you have for such advice?" Yes, Mr. Graham, we would like to know where you get your authority for your wicked compromise?
***
January, 1983 -- AIDING AND ABETTING APOSTASY! Christians who in any way encourage leaders and institutions involved in serious departures from the truth generally do so either: 1. Because they are uninformed as to the facts, or 2. Because they do not care enough about what God has to say about departure from His Word and will. In either case they are aiding and abetting apostasy. For this they will have to give an account to God. Nor will He accept the many excuses offered by compromisers who are more interested in personal friendships, positions or temporal gain than in doing the will of God. So don’t take lightly the declensions of men and organizations once true to the Faith, lest you find yourself seriously out of the will of God!
***
January, 1983 -- THE PERIL OF A PRESUMPTUOUS PIETY! In a large poster distributed by the Central Florida Billy Graham Crusade, the popular evangelist is presented as posing in prayer over the Scripture verse, II Chronicles 7:14. Upon seeing this advertisement, Proverbs 28:9 came immediately to mind, "He that turneth. away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." If ever this Scripture truth had an application, ~it most certainly has to Billy Graham! His is a presumptuous piety - an abomination in the eyes of a holy God. The following letter was addressed by the pastor to Pastor Clarence M. Yates of the Pinecastle United Methodist Church: "Greetings in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ! Let me thank you for your gracious letter of November 5 in reply to mine in protest against the forthcoming Graham Crusade. It is evident that you believe in an inclusivistic evangelism; I do not. Over three decades of wicked identification with blatant unbelievers in so—called ‘Christian fellowship,’ have caused Billy Graham’s influence to spawn a shallow, superficial, spurious, counterfeit form of Christianity which is not genuine Christianity at all. He no longer believes that Biblical inerrancy is the ground of Christian fellowship. Do you? He does not believe that faith in the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ is essential to salvation. Do you? His thinking has changed to the point where he now promotes a form of the social gospel. Do you? Nor can I pray for him and his crusades, or for those who promote them, lest I be a partaker of his evil deeds (II John 6-11). There comes a time when God says, ‘Pray not for this people for their good’ (Jeremiah 14:11). Again and again, in chapters 14 and 15 of his prophecy, Jeremiah pleads with God to give revival; and again the Lord tells him to stop praying. Even though Moses and Samuel - two of Israel’s greatest intercessors - were to intercede, it was morally impossible for Him to give revival, 15:1. When people who profess to know the Lord can no longer discern the difference between truth and error, right and wrong, that which is holy and that which is unholy, they are no longer capable of repenting, and without repentance revival is impossible. Separation from apostasy is genuine revival." There was no response to this letter.
***
January, 1983 - INIQUITOUS INFIDELITY! Back in the 1950's, Dr. Leslie D. Weatherhead, Methodist Modernist, participated and took part in the Billy Graham campaign held in England. He said: "Let him (Graham) get the people into the churches, and we will teach them the theology." Following is a sample of Weatherhead’s wicked theology, from his book, The Transforming Friendship: ‘Yet, though there has been progress, many still cling to the legal aspect of the Cross. Crudely and briefly, in their view, God is the judge on the bench - holy, righteous, and just. Humanity is the prisoner in the dock. The prisoner has committed sin in the past and present, and will do so in the future. The only sentence which will satisfy the Divine Justice is endless hell for the whole human race. Christ in his passion takes this punishment upon Himself. Except for His intervention the sentence must have been carried out. Divine Justice must be vindicated. Surely to the modern man a thousand questions leap to the mind. Would to God that some one could take it, like a burden from a weary back, and carry it for me! But, even if it were as easy as that, how could He pay in the past a debt which I have not yet fully scored up in God’s account? Can blood that flowed two thousand years ago wash that away?" By permitting this religious renegade on his platform, Graham becomes guilty of theological treachery!
***
February, 1983 -- RELIGIOUS RELATIVITY is the curse of contemporaneous Christianity. As far back as 1954, Billy Graham openly disavowed fundamentalism and declared himself to be a Conservative—Liberal. In so saying he categorizes himself as being among the vast multitude of Neo-Orthodox ministers and theologians who evidently believe that a horse can be ridden in opposite directions at the same time, and who furthermore insist that this is the only way to ride a horse. Neo-Orthodox theology is irrational to the very core. Reason and revelation are necessarily contradictory, the one to the other. No fact of history can be an object of faith for the proponents of this poisonous philosophy. "Faith if it proceeds from anything but a void, is unbelief," says Karl Barth (Epistle to the Romans, p. 37). In other words, faith must be totally separated from facts. If we believe in the virgin birth, incarnation, atoning death, and resurrection of Christ as facts of history, we are guilty of unbelief according to Barth! "We do not demand belief in our faith" (Ibid., p. 99). But how in the name of common sense can you have faith without believing anything? It is through the use of this irrationalizing process that Barth is able to affirm faith in the resurrection of Christ and at the same time say: "This tomb may prove to be definitely closed or an empty tomb; it is really a matter of indifference. What avails the tomb, proved to be this or that, at Jerusalem in the year A.D. 30?" (The Resurrection of the Dead, p. 135). Did Barth believe in the resurrection of Christ? The answer is yes and no — yes, as a sentimental symbol; no, so far as the actual fact of His resurrection as Sovereign Saviour is concerned. For the disciples of Neo—Orthodoxy there are no doctrinal or moral absolutes. Truth becomes a merely relative concept. It can be manipulated in such a manner as to make it mean anything anyone wants it to mean. Says Emil Brunner, "A revelation which could be proved would be no revelation.. .Truth lies outside the realm of reason." (The Mediator, pp. 201,42) There comes to mind the statement of Graham to seventy-five clergymen in New York City, in 1957, when he held out his Bible and declared: "I cannot prove or disprove anything in this Book. Therefore I accept all of it." It is readily apparent that he took the same mighty agnostic "leap of faith" as did Barth, Brunner, Niebuhr and Tillich — whom he endorsed as "the greatest theologians of today."
***
February, 1983 - WHY? WHY? WHY? does Dr. Graham always advise converts to go to the church of their choice — Catholic, liberal, or Jewish - instead of directing them to fundamental assemblies? WHY does Dr. Graham confuse the issue between truth and error by trying to blend evangelicalism and modernism together, whose offspring is a neuter salvation? WHY does Dr. Graham endorse and recommend the modernistic Revised Standard Version of the Bible, which denies the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ? WHY does Dr. Graham insist upon having modernists and liberals serving with evangelicals on his various Crusade committees? WHY does Dr. Graham speak of himself as a "conservative liberal" and a "constructionist" rather than an old—fashioned fundamentalist? WHY does he ask that fundamentalists forget their differences and work together with blatant unbelieving liberals in his evangelistic programs? WHY doesn’t he realize that the reason he gets so much press ad TV coverage is because he is compromising truth with error? WHY didn’t he refer to the plenary inspiration and inerrancy of the Scripture, the virgin birth and absolute Deity of Christ, His substitutionary blood atonement, in his address before the student body at the thoroughly modernistic Union Theological Seminary? WHY did he say to Stanley Rowland, Jr., reporter for the New York Times, that a few years ago he "became skeptical of the Bible"? WHY did he say to a group of Episcopal clergymen, "I overcame my skepticism with an act of faith, and I am not now quite the Biblical literalist that I am widely supposed to be"? WHY Dr. Graham, do you walk contrary to the Word of God in trying to yoke believers with unbelievers? WHY do you encourage righteousness to fellowship with unrighteousness? WHY, Dr. Graham, WHY?
***
February, 1983 -- WILL BILLY GRAHAM PLEASE EXPLAIN why Malcolm Muggeridge was permitted to be on the platform of the Lausanne Conference on Evangelism in 1974? Not only was he permitted to participate, but as one of the featured speakers, was praised by Graham and the president of the Southern Baptist Convention. At the close of his remarks he received a standing ovation. In his book, Jesus Rediscovered, he wrote: "Christ’s mother, Mary, conceived him out of wedlock, but believed, when an inner voice told her that her pregnancy was divinely ordained" (p. 1). He said that "The various dogmas of institutionalized Christianity -like, for instance the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the Immaculate Conception -just do not impinge; I neither believe nor disbelieved them, and feel no inclination to defend or denounce them. I find them perfectly comprehensible, perfectly harmless, and — as far as I’m concerned — totally without significance. Nor does the historicity of the Gospel’s account of Christ’s birth, life, and death worry me at all. If, to morrow, someone were to unearth another Dead Sea scroll proving that, in earthly terms, the traditional Christian story just didn’t happen that way it wouldn’t disturb my attitude to Christianity at all. Legends, in any case, seem to be more relevant to our human situation, and in that sense more ‘factual,’ than history" (p. 7l). On page 95 he says: "To imagine this deity having a son in any particular sense, and this son to have been born of a virgin, and to have lived on earth for thirty years or so as a man; then to have died and to have risen from the dead, is, as far as I am concerned beyond credibility." It has just been reported in the secular press that Muggeridge has now joined the Roman Catholic Church. Has Billy Graham no conscience against such rank infidelity? Apparently not! If not, why not? Could it be that he shares the same sympathetic agnosticism toward truth as that of Muggeridge?
***
February, 1983 -- THEOLOGICAL TREACHERY! Dr. Kenneth Kantzer, while editor of Christianity Today (the magazine that was established for the express purpose of promoting Billy Graham’s ecumenical evangelism), stated that: "Inerrancy, the most sensitive of all issues to be dealt with in the years immediately ahead, should not be made a test for Christian fellowship in the body of Christ." In so saying he was simply parroting the champion of compromise and confusion - Graham himself — who said the same thing in an open letter published by the Radio Gospel Fellowship of Denver, Colorado, more than twenty years ago. Declared Graham: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture but, rather, the ground of our fellowship is to be the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. I, myself, hold to the verbal inspiration viewpoint; I think any other position is fraught with danger. However, many of the leading evangelicals, and even fundamentalists when pinned down, do not hold to the verbal inspiration of Scripture." It appears that the faith of Graham and Kantzer is purely existential in character, admitting of any number of viewpoints as a valid basis for Christian fellowship. They need to be informed that the verbal inspiration of Scripture is not a mere viewpoint, but a solid fact. Those who reject the doctrine of inerrancy have no right to call themselves Christians. Fellowship on any other basis than the inerrancy of the Word of God is open sin. It is incipient apostasy. How long will sincere faith in the deity Christ remain if the authority of the Bible is surrendered?
***
March, 1983 -- A MONGRELIZE MIXTURE! Under the theme. "A Call for a New Church Council," the following statement appeared in Newsweek, February 21, 1983: "The National Council of Churches, under heavy attack by conservative religious and political organizations for its alleged support of left-wing causes, now faces another challenge that ultimately may undercut its authority. Some leading Protestant churchmen believe that the NCC is no longer adequate to encompass the burgeoning movement for Christian unity; they want a new ecumenical body that would include not only the main—line Protestant and Orthodox churches, but the Roman Catholic Church and conservative evangelicals as well (underlining by the pastor). About forty heads of Protestant denominations will meet with the president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and evangelist Billy Graham in a two day closed-door session in Minneapolis next month to hear a proposal for such an organization." What an unholy mess! And B.G., the caampion of all charlatans is expected to be in the middle of it. Remember this when he comes to Orlando for the Cnetral Florida Crusade. We said long ago that it would happen - those who straddle the fence and refuse to take a solid stand for Biblical separation from every form of unbelief will ultimately end up in the very camp of apostasy.
***
March, 1983 - NOXIOUS NEUTRALISM! The word "noxious" means "hurtful; harmful; pernicious; poisonous." The word "neutral" indicates "neither the one nor the other.’ In his booklet, The New Neutralism, the late Dr. William E. Ashbrook, on page 10, wrote: ‘Much that was formerly denied in the Graham Crusades is now openly admitted. The worst of modernists are among the leading supporters; converts are turned over to liberal churches without apology; Church Council support is not only whole—heartedly sought but gladly received; a fawning ‘love,’ so called, is freely bestowed upon the very worst of apostates; and the only unloved ones in the inclusivist, ecumenical lovefeast are the ‘nasty, bitter, unloving extremists’ known as fundamentalists, who from Biblical conviction refuse to ride this neutralist gravy train!" For the past thirty—four years we have taken a solid stand against such wicked compromise — a stand which we do not intend to abandon now, or ever.
***
March, 1983 -- HELLISH HERESY! It was Dr. Harold J. Ockenqa, Father of the New Evangelicalism, who said that the bi—weekly publication, Christianity Today, was founded to articulate the convictions of the movement. Carl Henry was its first editor. His views as stated in the following paragraph, taken from the magazine itself, well reflect the editorial mind of the ecumanics: "Dr. Henry asserts that the Modernist—Fundamentalist conflict of the past fifty years is over; that classic liberalism and the old fundamentalism are dead. He says we are now living in a new world in which people are not concerned with the old controversies, but are thinking in terms of unity and unanimity." What ever you do, my friend, do not categorize Carl Henry, Billy Graham, and the rest of the compromising evangelicals as fundamentalists. They are not. They have long since disavowed the term - Graham, as far back as 1954. What we are witnessing in the "dramatic new dimensions" of ecumenical evangelism is nothing more or less than the culmination and climax of the damnable double-standard doctrine and inclusivistic policy of the National Association of Evangelicals as practised since its inception. Having abandoned fundamentalism, what emphasis will they promote? In an address delivered at Union Theological Seminary, Henry expressed a number of pivotal points of what he called "the evangelical view of revelation." As point #1 he said: "The evangelical view distinguishes the personal Word of God, the Logos Theou, from the Word of God written, or the Hrema Theou. It affirms the priority of the personal or speaking Word over the spoken or written Word." Did Carl Henry learn this from Karl Barth? Thy speech betrayeth thee, Dr. Henry! The language of the New Evangelicals and the language of the Neo-Orthodox is identical - one and the same. The Bible is no longer the final authority for those who believe in a continuing revelation through a personal divine encounter a la Barth.
***
March, 1983 -- THE FOLLY OF FENCE STRADDLING~ Under the date of October 25, 1982, the pastor received the following letter from Tom Moffit of WTLN: "Dear Rev. Minnick — Thank you for your letter of October 14, requesting thatDISCOVERY reprint your letter to Rev. Jim Henry. Our newspaper, in no way, took a position of endorsement of the Graham Crusade. Rather, we simply presented a news item that would be of interest to broad spectrum of those in the Christian community. You might feel that we are wrong in not taking a stand, however, the intent of our newspaper is not to take stands on obvious controversial issues within the Christian community. There are many good men who believe as you concerning Billy Graham. Likewise, there are many good men who see the issue from a different perspective. It is our desire to stay out of the conflict. I hope you understand." Under the date of October 30, the pastor replied: "Dear Tom -Greetings in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ! Let me thank you for your letter of reply to mine. But let me say that you ought to he ashamed of yourself for writing it. The most despicable class of people on the face of the earth is the compromising crowd who, in times of moral and spiritual crisis, strive to maintain neutrality. As a matter of fact, you have positioned yourself in giving space in your paper to the promotion of the forthcoming Graham Crusade. Would it not be fair to give equal space to those who wish to express opposition to his ministry? It would certainly make for news in the broad spectrum of ‘the Christian community’ of those who support him. By what criterion do you call men good who deliberately disobey the Word and will of God? There is a holy indictment delivered against those who have conditioned themselves against discerning truth from error, right from wrong, good from evil, Isaiah 5:20! I sincerely pray that you will be led of the Holy Spirit to take a stand against the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham."
***
April, 1983 - BILLY THE BRAGGART, in a recent article in TV Guide, had the unmitigated gall to say: "Each of my prime-time ‘specials’ is now carried by nearly 300 stations across the United States and Canada, so that in a single telecast I preach to millions more than Christ did in His entire lifetime. It took brass for him to say that. In his ascent to the pinnacle of pride and popularity, he has indeed achieved the acme of insolent impudence. For any mere mortal man to involve himself in a comparison of his own ministry with the ministry of Jesus Christ is nothing short of blasphemous. Just who does Graham think he is? That he is an extremely popular religious figure none will deny. That he is a servant of Christ, no Bible believing fundamentalist will affirm. His very popularity delineates him as an apostle from the truth. Let him speak out in condemnation of the diabolic hoax of papal authority, Mariolatry, the Mass, Purgatory, the Confessional, sacramental salvation, etcetera, and see how long he retains the confidence and cooperation of the Romanish hierarchy. Let him condemn the modernists and liberals as Bible-denying, Christ-rejecting sons off hell, and see how long he remains popular with the NCC and WCC crowd. Let him expose the exponents of Arminian theology as perverters of the Gospel of the grace of God and see how long they stay on his band-wagon. Let him censure the charisrnatics and the cultists and see how long it takes to he stripped of his popularity. Who knows - he might even end up on a cross. That’s what happened to Christ when He exposed and condemned the religious rogues of His day. By the grace of the living God we will shun that popularity enjoyed by those who identify themselves with the utter wickedness of ecumenical evangelism! Hebrews 13:12-13.
* * *
April, 1983 —— HOW HOT IS HELL? Not so hot as the Bible says it is, according to Billy Graham. In an interview with Orlando Sentinel religious writer John Gholdston, the champion of compromise and confusion was asked, "Why do you think that so many Americans don’t accept the concept of hell?" To this Graham replied: "I think we’ve always had a difficult time with the subject of hell because in the Middle Ages we got the concept of horns, a tail, and a pitch-fork and all that sort of thing — Dante’s description of hell. I think that hell essentially is separation from God forever. And that is the worst hell that I can think of. But I think people have a hard time believing God is going to allow people to burn in literal fire forever. I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched." In a message some two decades ago he said: "Hell is not a sadistic torture chamber.’ He assured his audience that some preachers have made hell so hot with a vivid imagination that they have made it "abhorrent to the love of God.’ Such language pleases the modernists, liberals, neo—orthodox, and New Evangelicals very well! If hell be not a torture chamber, Mr. Graham, tell us, please, the meaning of Revelation 14:9-1l! "Tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb"! If the Bible means what it says, and it surely does, the writhing of Christ—rejecting sinners in eternal conscious torment of a never—ending hell will be a source of complete satisfaction to a righteous and holy God. You had better believe it, Mr. Graham
***
April. 1983 —— THE CURSE OF CONFORMITY! Under the date of April 7. 1983.. the pastor addressed the following letter to Tom Moffit of Radio WTLN: "Dear Tom - Greetings in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ! Pursuant to our telephone conversation of yesterday afternoon in which you indicated your refusal to air our tapes on The Awfulness of Aiding and Abetting Apostasy, I felt constrained to write this further word. The suppression of the truth is a shameful thing, and particularly so when it is clone by one who professes to be a Christian. I suspect that you might have had a few sleepless moments list night over some of the things you said to me. If there is sufficient evidence for believing that Billy Graham is an apostate from the truth, have I not the right to expose him as such? If I am convinced on the authority of the Word of God that the compromised character of his Christianity is in fact a counterfeit Christianity, have I not the impelling responsibility of warning those under the influence of my ministry of its corrupting influence? If the mass of blind evangelical idol worshippers in the Central Florida area wish to endorse and support the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham, that is their prerogative. They are a liberty to do so. But have I not, by the same token, the right to express my God-given convictions over a paid radio broadcast? You have deprived me of this liberty. I do not know who they are who pressured you into bowing under the curse of conformity. It is apparent that they had not the courage to contact me personally. There always is a certain amount of cowardice in those who try to prevent the altar of Baal from being thrown down. I will meet them - and you - at the judgment bar of a holy God and testify against the whole compromising crowd. I Thessalonians 2:4. In Jesus’ Precious Name, (signed by the pastor).
May, 1983 —- NOTHING NEW! For the past three decades Billy Graham has been sending his converts back to the modernistic morgues, Jewish synagogues, and Catholic cathedrals from whence they originally came. There was no departure from this during his recent Central Florida Crusade. In the Florida Catholic of April 29, 1983, on page 3, under the caption, "Diocesan Follow-up Begins,’ appears the following: "More than one hundred and fifty Catholic lay people from throughout the Orlando diocese have become involved in the follow-up to the recent Billy Graham Crusade. Prior to Dr. Graham’s Orlando Crusade, April 10—17, Bishop Thomas J. Grady instructed local parishes to provide follow-up programs for those Catholics who would in some way express their commitment to Christ during the Orlando Crusade. The Billy Graham Crusade refers to their respective churches the people who commit their lives to Jesus Christ during the Crusade (underlining for emphasis is the pastor’s). During the Orlando Crusade more than six hundred and fifty Catholics made such a commitment. The Crusade, having contacted local Catholics concerning the follow-up, also helped organize the Catholic effort among these Catholic Christians who have made a decision for Christ or renewed their original commitment. The group of one hundred and fifty Catholic evangelists met with a Graham Crusade official at St. James Cathedral Community Center. The plan to reach the six hundred and fifty was developed by Father Bob Hoeffner, ecumenical officer of the diocese, Father David Page, cathedral director and Mr. Frank Sevick, cathedral director of religious education." Surely this is not Biblical evangelism! If Catholics are truly converted they will leave the Roman Catholic Church and its idolatrous system, and until they do, there is no evidence of genuine saving faith.
***
October, 1983 -— AN ECUMENICAL EXTRAVAGANZA was featured during the latter part of the summer in Amsterdam of the Netherlands. This religious assembly was called the International Council of Itinerant Evangelists, and was financed and directed by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. More than four thousand attended, with the expenses lavishly showered upon the evangelists from more than one hundred nations, 90% of whom had never been out of their countries previously. This "conglomeration" — which means a mixed mass - exceeded that of Berlin in 1966 and Lausanne in 1974. Billy Graham featured himself and sought to persuade these itinerant preachers concerning his position on the Soviet Union, impressing upon them the "liberty" he found there, the righteousness of the proposal to freeze all nuclear weapons, and his own expectation of conducting a campaign in the Soviet Union from Leningrad to Odessa. He announced that six million dollars would be raised in addition to the some eight million that the conference had cost. Standing before his audience, Graham commended the World Council of Churches and expressed his support for this antichrist organization. These poor, mostly uneducated, itinerant, barefoot evangelists were overwhelmed. There were others, however, who resented it. Where did these funds come from? From compromising Christians who support him in his wicked program of ecumenical evangelism, who endorse his acceptance of the Soviet Union, and who are pleased with his participation in the World Council of Churches. The judgment is upon them!
***
October, 1983 —— THE PAPAL PUPPET! Dr. Horace F. Dean of Philadelphia, a staunch fundamentalist leader who has wielded enormous influence for God and for the good in this nation, sent out a document to one hundred evangelical leaders in the U.S.A. and Canada concerning Dr. Billy Graham’s meeting with the Pone at the Vatican on January 13, 1981. He reported thus: ‘Strangely, news of Dr. Graham’s activities like that reported here is not carried in Decision magazine which goes to multitudes of fundamental believers who generously support his work. This can he regarded as unholy deception. Damnable deception it is!
***
February, 1984 - THE BRIDGE BUILDERS! An amazing article written by Billy Graham appeared in the Saturday Evening Post for January - February, 1980. It was entitled, "The Pilgrim Pope: A Builder of Bridges." In the concluding paragraph he said: "During his visit to Amrica, Pope John Paul II was indeed a bridge builder - and that is something our divided world desperately needs." He praised the Pope as a statesman, a pastor, and an evangelist and claimed that the Pope was "pointing people to Christ." He called the Pope the "greatest religious leader of the modern world and one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century." According to a Religious News Service report for January 13, 1981, "Pope John Paul II ws closeted for almost two hours with the Rev. Billy Graham, the world’s best know Protestant evangelist." It appears that Billy G. is bent, bound, and determined to have the stage set for the appearance of the Antichrist when he comes upon the scene! On welcoming Graham the Pope said: "We are brothers." Later at a press conference Billy said: "We had a spiritual time." Can this possibly be the experience and statement of a discerning believer in the Lord Jesus Christ? Incidently, the title Pontifex Maximus, by which the Romans designated their chief priest, means literally, the Chief Bridge—builder. Who better deserves this title than Graham himself, who has outdone even the Pope in the matter of building ecumenical bridges. As Bible-believing fundamentalists we will have nothing to do with the ecumaniacal dreamers and their dreams. We will expose and condemn their utter wickedness in obedience to the command of God’s holy Word. We absolutely refuse to cross those bridges of compromise with the enemies of God, Christ, and the Bible. Beware of the menace of Molech!
***
February, 1984 -— DIALECTICAL DECEIT! In Evangelism and the Church Today, Billy Graham stated: :The great theologians of today are Rudolph Bultmann, Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Reinhold Niehuhr, Paul Tillich, and Carl Henry. This declaration was made while Barth and Tillich were still on the earth scene. Neither of these men believed in a factual faith. Their theology was irrational to the very core. Reason and revelation are necessarily contradictory, the one to the other. No fact of history can be an object of faith for neo—orthodox theologians. In their system of thought faith must be separated from facts. "Faith if it proceeds from anything but a void, is unbelief," says Barth in his Epistle to the Romans, p.37. On page 99 he continues: "We do not demand belief in our faith." Time magazine, in its appraisal of Tillich, said, "Faith, according to Tillich, is not belief in God, but ‘ultimate concern. ‘ Hence, an atheist is a believer too. Doubt is an inevitable part of faith." With his high praise of those who advocate a dialectical theology, one remembers Graham’s candid confession to a or group of fifty clergymen in ].957, that he had become skeptical of the Bible to the extent that he seriously considered quitting the ministry. He said, as he held out his Bible, "I do not know whether any part of this is true. However, I overcame my skepticism with an act of faith, and I am not now quite the Biblical literalist I am widely supposed to be." In plain words he is telling us that his faith is not a factual faith, but a faith which resembles that of Barth and Tillich — faith in a sentimental symbol. It is readily apparent that he took the same mighty agnostic "leap of faith" as did Barth, Brunner, Niebuhr and Tillich -whom he endorsed as "the great theologians of today."
***
March, 1984 -- A FLAGRANTLY FATAL FRATERNIZATION! In a telegram addressed to Dr. J. Philip Potter, General Secretary of the WCC, Billy Graham said: "There seems to he a growing grass roots desire for renewal within the church and emphasis on evangelism and service. it is my prayer that Vancouver (where the World Council of Churches held its Sixth Assembly last August) and Amsterdam (where Graham was holding his International Conference for Itinerant Evangelists) will both experience Pentecostal blessings that could possibly bring about the extension of the kingdom of God in a world so filled with danger. May God grant YOU personally his wisdom as you lead this Sixth Assembly. Signed, Billy Graham." In his closing press statement Graham declared: "I deeply appreciated the warm telegrams of greetings and the promise of prayers for us from leaders of the World Council, including one from Dr. Potter, the General Secretary.... I cannot help hut recall that I was present in 1948 when the World Council of Churches was formed here in Amsterdam, in large part out of the desire of many for a new thrust in evangelism and world missions. The World Council has its roots deeply in biblical evangelism." Come now, Dr. Graham, have you forgotten that when asked what the WCC would accomplish at its formation in 1948 you stated: "I believe they are going to nominate the antichrist." How is it that you are now giving your blessing to this anti—God, anti—Christ, anti-Gospel organization which in reality promotes Socialism, communism and world revolution?
***
April, 1984 -- DASTARDLY AND DREADFUL ARE THE DENIALS of Christ-rejecters in clerical garb! Duncan E. Littlefair, while pastor of the Fountain Street Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, wrote a book in which he said: "The Resurrection was not a physical event in history. If the body of Jesus had been raised physically it would only have been required to die again. We have made the physical aspect of the Resurrection the important thing...the final triumph of the spirit is degenerated into being a physical victory. It is a shame and disgrace, really, that all these centuries we should be living and thinking about the glory of the Resurrection on such levels as these." What is this joker doing in the ministry? Dr. John Sutherland Bonnell, inLook Magazine, March 23, 1954, under the subject, "What is a Presbyterian?" Wrote: "Do Presbyterians believe in the Resurrection? With a few exceptions Presbyterians do not interpret the phrase in the Apostle’s Creed, ‘the resurrection of the body,’ as meaning the physical body. They understand ‘the resurrection of the body’ as a reference to the spiritual body, which is a medium of growth and self-expression appropriate to a spiritual world." This is the religious renegade with whom Billy Graham, along with Jesse Bader (head of the National Council of Churches department of Evangelism), met in a hotel room, locked the door, threw away the key, and held an all day prayer meeting about a year after the above article was written. Dr. Karl Barth, in his Resurrection of the Dead, p. 135, declared: "This tomb may prove to be definitely closed or an empty tomb; it is really a matter of indifference. What avails the tomb, proved to be this or that, at Jerusalem in the year A.D. 30?" Barth has been hailed by Graham as one of the great theologians of the century. The champion of compromise and confusion will be held accountable for the theological treachery in which he has involved himself over a period of many years.
***
May, 1984 —- A MEALYMOUTHED MAN, according to dictionary definition, is one who is "unwilling or hesitating to tell the truth in plain language; inclined to speak in softer terms than the truth will warrant." Under the date of January 23, 1984, the following news report appeared: "The Rev. Billy Graham worked behind the scenes last spring to help President Reagan assess what the reaction of evangelical leaders would be to U.S. establishment of full diplomatic ties with the Vatican, TheChicago Sun-Times reported yesterday. Graham, who since Watergate has downplayed his relationship to U.S. Presidents, summed up his findings in a confidential, seven-page letter to Interior Secretary William P. Clark- then the president’s national security advisor, the newspaper said. ‘If anyone can do it and get away with it, it is Mr. Reagan, ‘ Graham reported, quoting a comment from one of his contacts. Graham said in a letter that he made several ‘discreet inquiries’ on a ‘confidential basis, and no mention was made of the fact that the inquiries were being made at the request of the White House. Graham told Clark the reactions to expect from several ‘recognized Leaders among evangelicals, ‘ then wrote, ‘I honestly don’t know what I personally would recommend that the president do.’" The pastor was not consulted by Mr. Reagan for his advice but he gave it anyway in a letter to the president dated January 12:
"In the establishment of diplomatic relationship with the Vatican, you are violating the principle of separation between church and state. You have betrayed the trust placed in you by God-fearing American citizens who upon biblical authority, will never bow to the authority of the Pope. The most terrible soul-enslaving system ever to curse the face of the earth is epitomized in the Roman hierarchy. Within the past five centuries freedom from its hellish bondage has been secured at awful cost, and now you are again validating its authority.
***
December, 1984 -- BILLY’S BETRAYAL! In a letter from Don Randall, missionary to Northern Ireland, he writes: "Dr. Billy Graham was recently in England and while he was there he met with some of the bishops of the Church of England. it was reported in our newspaper that Dr. Graham told the bishops to keep any doubts they have about the Bible to themselves and keep on preaching. He also said he was not sure the Resurrection was essential to salvation. Can you imagine just how many will go out into a Christless eternity because of statements like that? My Bible says in I Corinthians 15:17, ‘And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.’" And so does mine, my dear brother, so does mine! The bankruptcy of Graham’s faith became evident more than a quarter of a century ago when, with his high praise for those who advocate a dialectical theology (Barth, Brunner, Tillich, and Niebuhr), one remembers his candid confession to a group of fifty clergymen in 1957, that he had become skeptical of the Bible to the extent that he seriously considered quitting the ministry. Referring to his Bible, he said: "I do not know whether any part of this is true. However, I overcame my skepticism with an act of faith, and I am not now quite the biblical literalist that I am widely supposed to be." In plain words he was telling those ministers that his faith is not a factual faith, but a faith that resembles that of the dialectical theologians - faith in a sentimental symbol. No longer a biblical literalist in 1957, by 1962, in an open letter published by the Radio Gospel Fellowship of Denver, this religious renegade said: "I do not believe that the ground of our fellowship is to be the inerrancy of Scripture." What other foundation for faith is there, Mr. Graham? By 1966 he had come to the conclusion that faith in the virgin birth was not necessary for personal salvation and said so in the United Church Observer, July 1, of that year. Ought we now to be surprised and shocked to learn that the has doubt as to the necessity of the Resurrection for salvation? By no means. All through the years he has been doing what he now advises the Church of England bishops to do - keep their doubts to themselves and go on preaching anyway!
***
March, 1985 - THE POPE PRAISER, Billy Graham, reported that during his trip to Russia, he had been awakened early one morning by his son to hear the Pope’s message given at Vancouver. Graham was quoted directly as saying: "I’ll tell you — that was just about as straight an evangelical address as I’ve ever heard. Of course, I’m a great admirer of his. He gives moral guidance in a world that seems to have lost its way.’ A devastating loss of discernment has made B.G. spiritually blind as a bat!
***
May, 1985 —— THE CHAMPION OF COMPROMISE is still compounding the confusion he has wrought in the evangelical world over the past three and a half decades through the promotion of ecumenical evangelism. Capitulation of conscience and the wholesale sacrifice of theological integrity is readily revealed in the characteristically neutral stance he is currently taking on the issue of biblical inerrancy. It is reported in the Nashville Banner, 3/21/65, that Billy Graham ‘said he would not attend the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in Dallas in June because he did not want to get involved in the church’s battle over biblical inerrancy. Biblical inerrancy is the doctrine that all of the Bible is the inspired word of God and, as such, is infallible, ‘I am an evangelist, and I must appeal to as wide a range of people as possible, ‘ he said. ‘I believe in the holy, inspired word of God, but I have friends on both sides. There are some things on both sides of the battle that are almost irreconcilable. It will be difficult to bridge the gap. But there is one thing that can reunite the Baptists, and that is the preaching of the Gospel. They can all agree on that.’" How in the name of all that is holy, Mr. Graham, do you suppose that men who reject the inerrancy of the Bible are capable of preaching the Gospel? To reject the doctrine of inerrancy is to destroy the foundation of evangelical faith. Of all the fence straddlers in the history of the church, you are by far and away without a peer. For God’s sake, and the sake of the souls to whom you minister, get down off the fence and declare yourself one way or the other!
***
July, 1985 -- THE PROMOTION OF POISONOUS PROPAGANDA, acclaiming religious liberty in the Soviet Union, has been engaged in by the National and World Councils of Churches and denominations identified with these apostate organizations, since the end of World War II. More recently, derelict evangelicals have involved themselves in the same nefarious pursuit; among whom the most notorious are Billy Graham and Bill Bright. Early this year an unexpected development transpired when Time magazine devoted twenty-two pages in two issues to Arkady Shevchenko, ranking Soviet diplomat at the United Nations until his defection in 1978. In his book, Breaking With Moscow, Shevchenko makes reference to Georgi Arbatov who is described as an Americanologist. He is the top KGB agent whose mission is to influence the thinking of the United States in favor of Communism. This is the man with whom Billy Graham spent three—and~one..half hours in Moscow and came away saying that he was such a fine gentleman. Depicted as "part of a troika of the most familiar Soviet faces appearing in the West when the Kremlin needed to influence public opinion," it appears that Arbatov was highly successful in the propaganda job he did on Graham. Since the shattering testimony of Solzhenitsyn a decade ago, Shevchenko’s book is the most revealing piece of evidence in proof of the fact that the Soviet system is all that the late Senator Joe McCarthy said it was. Censured by the U.S. Congress, he was driven to a premature death and an early grave. It was congress that ought to have been censured, not the Senator. Let the Soviet sympathizers in the New Evangelical camp be recognized for what they are - dupes of the Devil’s deception.
***
July, 1985 - CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM cannot co-exist together on the same earth. One or the other will be destroyed. "War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable," so said the man who headed the Russian delegation to the United Nations when it was formed back in 1945, Dimitry E. Manuilsky. "To win we shall need the element of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down we shall smash them with clenched fists." Remember this the next time you see a picture of the clenched fist. The Soviet peace offensive has had a devastating effect upon the thinking of many Americans, including the ecumenical evangelist, Billy Graham. It will be remembered that only three years ago he travelled to Moscow to address the "World Conference of Religious Workers for Saving the Sacred Gift of Life From Nuclear Catastrophe." Was he being naive or just plain stupid? What in the name of all that is holy was he doing at a conference of "religious workers," promoting the Soviet peace offensive? Only a traitor to the truth would be so blind as to believe that a nation of godless atheists and bloody murderers would have an interest in genuine peace.
***
Detente with the Devil is a delusive device, and Graham has permitted himself to be "suckered" into it. It was Kruschev who said: "Of course we must realize that we cannot coexist eternally. One of us must go to his grave. So what must he done? We must push them into their graves." And they are attempting to do it through detente. We need to remember that there is no possible way that you can shake hands with a clenched fist.
***
December, 1985 -— LAS VEGAS CONVERT! At the time of Billy Graham’s five-day Las Vegas crusade, he told a news conference that he was not in the city "to criticize Las Vegas and its sometimes over-publicized life style." And now comes a news clipping picturing this "man-of-the—cloth" doing a burlesque, vaudeville type dance routine with Hollywood actor John Davidson and television personality Mike Douglas. Underneath the picture was the explanation: "Didn’t know that the Rev. Billy Graham tap-danced. did you? Neither did we. Here’s Billy with Mike Douglas and that nice young John Davidson, and they’re doing a little number during the Las Vegas taping of an upcoming Douglas show." One wonders just how he will be able to claim that he was "misquoted" in this escapade. Sin—blinded, worldly-minded, compromising evangelicals will see nothing at all wrong with such conduct. In the eyes of a holy God - and those who have any spiritual sense -this type of thing is an utter shame and disgrace! Isn’t it time that someone had the courage to raise a voice of protest against the damnable hypocrisy of this "great soul—winner"? We would not be at all surprised to find the whole New Evangelical camp tap—dancing in the near future. For what their hero does, they all soon do.
***
December, 1985 -- A FIRST CLASS FARCE! "The crowds of people who throng to Billy Graham’s podium after a stirring sermon are more than just converts," according to a UPI dispatch, June 23, 1978. "Many are ‘ringers’ planted to bolster the impact, Human Behavior Magazine said today. An article in the July issue reports the findings of a four—member team from Arizona State University that infiltrated the Graham organization during its 1974 visit to Phoenix. ‘Advance men show up in the community four to six weeks before the Crusade starts to counsel and advise the locals, ‘ the magazine said. ‘By the time Graham arrives in town and makes his altar call, an army of six thousand await with instructions at when to come forth at varying intervals to create the impression of a spontaneous mass outpouring, the article said. The report noted that ‘the acceptance of Christ, ‘ once regarded as a deeply personal experience has been bureaucratized and routinized like the rest of today’s mass culture." We could not have summed it up better! This procedure dates back to as far as his 1957 New York campaign. It borders on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit whose ministry alone it is to convict and convert the unregenerate souls of men, entirely apart from highly orchestrated man-made promotional programs which carry with them the stench of the flesh. The evils of ecumenical evangelism are many hut there are none more devastating than the manufacturing of counterfeit converts through the promotion of a compromised form of Christianity.
Paper written by Rev. Hayes K. Minnick