“But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand.” [Ezekiel 33:6]
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” [Ephesians 6:12]
Presbyterians Week Headlines
---
The following is excerpted
from “Jesuit Superior General: The Devil Is a Symbol,” DailyWire.com, Aug. 21,
2019: “On Wednesday, the Jesuit order’s superior general announced that Satan
himself is a ‘symbol’ rather than an actual being that was once created by God
before falling into damnation. According to Catholic News Agency, Fr. Arturo
Sosa told the Italian magazine Tempi that the devil ‘exists as the personification
of evil in different structures, but not in persons, because he is not a
person, he is a way of acting evil.’ ‘He is not a person like a human person.
It is a way of evil to be present in human life,’ asserted the priest. ‘Good
and evil are in a permanent war in the human conscience and we have ways to
point them out. We recognize God as good, fully good. Symbols are part of
reality, and the devil exists as a symbolic reality, not as a personal
reality.’ The Jesuit leader’s statement about the devil stands in stark
contrast with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that Satan
and his demons are ‘spiritual, non-corporeal beings’ who are nonetheless
‘personal and immortal creatures’ with an ‘intelligence and will.’ ... [A 2011
poll] showed eight in ten U.S. Catholics believe that Satan is just a symbol
more akin to that of Santa Claus than an actual being.” The Bible says, “For
such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the
apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an
angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be
transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to
their works” (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).
+ Way of Life Literature, Post Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
The
following is excerpted from “Pedophilia Being Taught,” Alex Newman, Project
Media, Apr. 17, 2019: “Government school officials in California think it is
‘really important’ to teach children about pedophilia and pederasty in the
classroom because it is a ‘sexual orientation.’ That is according to a top
official for California’s Brea Olinda School District, who admitted to parents
that it was being done-- and that it would continue, despite the outrage. The
implications are mindblowing. The stunning admission came after a parent - information
meeting last month for the Brea Olinda Unified School District (BOUSD).
Stephanie Yates, founder of Informed Parents of California, asked school
officials why they were ‘teaching pedophilia in school to 9th graders.’ But
instead of a denial that such an atrocity was taking place, a top school
official confirmed it was happening and acted like there was nothing wrong with
it. ‘This is done because we are talking about historical perspectives of how
gender relations and different types of sexual orientations have existed in
history,’ said BOUSD Assistant Superintendent of Curricula Kerrie Torres in a
matter-of-fact way, sounding almost oblivious to how the bombshell might sound
to normal people. Horrified, the mother turned activist expressed shock at
Torres’ admission. ‘So sex between a man and a boy is a sexual orientation?’
she asked. Torres did not deny it. ‘It’s something that occurred in history,
and so this is really important for us to include,’ the assistant
superintendent said, implying that yes, sexual relations between a man and a
boy--properly considered rape under the laws of every state--is a ‘sexual
orientation.’ Of course, if simply having ‘occurred in history’ means something
merits inclusion in school curricula, then one might ask why the birth, life,
death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ or the full text of the Mayflower
Compact are never mentioned in government schools. Obviously, there is more to
the story than simply having to teach children about such perversions merely because
they ‘occurred.’
Indeed,
the comments may be one of the most shocking admissions from an education official
in recent memory. And the implications go even beyond simply normalizing one of
the most disgusting and abominable crimes that can be perpetrated. Consider: With
‘sexual orientation’ increasingly becoming a legally protected category across almost
half of the states already—with Congress working on it, too—the implications of
defining pedophilia and pederasty as such are hard to overstate. For instance, in
California, ‘discrimination’ based on ‘sexual orientation’ is prohibited. If pedophiles
simply have a different ‘sexual orientation, ’does that mean schools are required
to hire them?
Establishment
propaganda outlets disguised as news organizations such as Salon and Slate have
also been working to normalize and redefine pedophilia and pederasty as a ‘sexual
orientation.’
LGBT
movement hero Harvey Milk, who is celebrated in California’s fake ‘history’ textbooks
as a great figure, was known for raping minor boys, at least one of whom later committed
suicide.”
+ Way of Life Literature, Post
Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
NEWS
PROVIDED BY
Evangelical Outreach
Evangelical Outreach
Sept. 5, 2019
WASHINGTON, Penn., Sept. 5, 2019 /Christian Newswire/ -- Are the Jehovah's Witnesses, Seven Day Adventists, and others like Ed Fudge, biblically correct about annihilation of the wicked? Here are related scriptures for your consideration. Referring to the Antichrist, we read:
"Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for
that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is
revealed, the man doomed to DESTRUCTION." (2 Thess. 2:3)
The
Antichrist is the "man doomed to destruction". The same Greek word
for "destruction" (apoleia) is also found here, where all eternally
lost people will go:
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the
gate and broad is the road that leads to DESTRUCTION, and many enter through
it." (Mat 7:13)
So
how will the Antichrist, and all others who die spiritually lost, be treated?
Since their "destruction" will be the same, the answer is
disturbingly clear, as we focus in on "the beast" (another title for
the Antichrist or the "man doomed to destruction" – 2 Thess. 2:3):
"But the beast was captured, and with him the
false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these
signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped
his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning
sulfur." (Rev 19:20)
Then
after the 1,000
year reign of Christ, that is, 1,000 years later "the beast" (or
"man doomed to destruction") will still not be annihilated; instead,
he will be tormented "forever and ever":
"And the devil, who
deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and
the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for
ever and ever." (Rev 20:10)
Again,
the beast, false prophet and devil will be tormented "forever and
ever", based on Rev. 20:10. The Greek term "forever" (aion),
will last as long as God will reign, which is FOREVER AND EVER, as shown here:
"The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and
there were loud voices in heaven, which said: 'The kingdom of the world has
become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign FOR EVER
AND EVER'." (Rev 11:15)
That
can NOT be annihilation. Rev. 20:10 (and Mt. 25:41) states that not only will
the devil be in the lake of burning sulfur to be "TORMENTED" day and
night forever and ever, but ALL unsaved people ("goats") will also be
there with the devil:
"Then he will say to those on his left [the
goats], 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for
the devil and his angels'." (Mat 25:41)
Hence,
the "ETERNAL FIRE" prepared for the devil and his angels, where lost
people also go, is the lake of fire (second death) mentioned in Rev. 20:10
where such will be tormented forever. That is how the soul is
"destroyed" (Mt. 10:28), but not annihilated in that special consuming
fire prepared for spirit beings (Mt. 25:41). The following gives more specifics
about the second death:
"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile,
the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the
idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning
sulfur. This is the second death" (Rev 21:8).
Is
it any wonder that the PRECIOUS Lord Jesus taught it is better to lose your
eye, hand or foot causing you to sin rather than go into unquenchable fire
(Mark 9:42-48)? Dear reader, from the very depths of your heart, deeply repent
of every sin and fully commit now to the PRECIOUS Lord Jesus to follow and obey
him till the end:
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will
not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor
the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the
kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were
sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in
the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor. 6:9-11, NASB)
"Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death." (Rev 2:10,11)
"Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death." (Rev 2:10,11)
One's
final end will be in PARADISE or the LAKE OF BURNING SULFUR (Rev.21:1-8; Rev.
2:7 cf. Rev. 22:1-5; Mt. 7:13-14). Where will you spend your eternity? It
depends on whether or not you faithfully follow the Lord Jesus Christ until the
end. Mary, the sacraments, water baptism, going to church, the 10 commandments,
etc. can NOT save your soul. Only an obedient, trusting, submitting and
enduring faith in the Lord Jesus can.
SOURCE Evangelical Outreach
CONTACT: 724-632-3210, contact@evangelicaloutreach.org
Related Links
EOMIN.org
SOURCE Evangelical Outreach
CONTACT: 724-632-3210, contact@evangelicaloutreach.org
Related Links
EOMIN.org
+ Christian
News Wire, 2020 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington
DC 20006, 202-546-0054, newsdesk@christiannewswire.com
Enlarged
September 4, 2019 (first published February 28, 1999)
David
Cloud, Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org
In the past, some readers
asked if I had personally warned Billy Graham about his disobedience.
The answer is no, I did not. I had no means of doing so. All of Dr. Graham's correspondence was filtered through his massive organization. I did not have the ear of Billy Graham.
I didn’t need to warn him, though. This was done repeatedly by men who had the opportunity to do so. We need to state emphatically that Dr. Billy Graham was warned many times for his disobedience to God's Word. In the early days of his compromise, Graham was warned by prominent Christian leaders such as Bob Jones, Sr., John R. Rice, Robert Shuler, G. Archer Weniger, James Bennet, Carl McIntire, Bryce Augsburger, Charles Woodbridge, and Robert Ketcham.
IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT BILLY GRAHAM IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS A FUNDAMENTALIST WHEN HE BEGAN PREACHING. He attended the fundamentalist Bob Jones College (later named Bob Jones University) and counted himself one of Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.'s preacher boys. Graham associate Cliff Barrows was a Bob Jones graduate. Graham interviewed Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., on his Hour of Decision radio broadcast in December 1951, and concluded by saying:
"It's wonderful in these days of secular and materialistic education to see a great University that stands for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not only old-fashioned Americanism that we so desperately need today, but is injecting into our society your men and women that take their stand for the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Billy Graham, radio broadcast, Bob Jones University, Dec. 1951).
Billy Graham, who has been called "Mr. Facing Two Ways," was already moving in a completely different direction from Bob Jones even as he was uttering this effusive praise. Graham was also on the Cooperating Board of John Rice's The Sword of the Lord. From December 1947 to 1952, Graham was also president of Northwestern Schools (founded by famous Fundamentalist leader William Bell Riley) and was editor of that school's Fundamentalist publication, The Pilot, the masthead of which boldly proclaimed a "militant stand against Modernism in every form." During his early years, Graham was awarded honorary doctorates from Northwestern and Bob Jones.
Writing in the April 1951 issue of The Pilot, the magazine of the Northwestern Schools, Graham said, “We do not condone nor have fellowship with any form of modernism.” Within six years, he was having fellowship with the rankest modernists alive in his New York City crusade.
Consider some of the men who personally pleaded with Graham to turn from his unscriptural path:
JAMES BENNET was a prominent New York attorney and Bible teacher who knew Billy Graham from the time he graduated from Wheaton. He encouraged Graham during the early years of his ministry, but when Graham began openly yoking together with Modernists and Catholics, Bennet attempted to turn him from this error. He met with Graham in New York City before the 1954 crusade and pleaded with him not to proceed with his ecumenical plans. When Graham refused to obey the Word of God, Bennet resigned from the campaign invitation committee and wrote a public warning about the direction Graham was pursuing (James E. Bennet, The Billy Graham New York Crusade: Why I Cannot Support It, A Ministry of Disobedience, Collingswood, NJ: Christian Beacon Press, May-September 1957).
Thus James Bennet lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. JOHN R. RICE, editor of the influential Sword of the Lord weekly Fundamental Baptist paper, also supported Graham during his early years. In fact, Graham was on the Cooperating Board of the Sword. Dr. Rice was a very loving and gracious Christian gentleman, and he pleaded with the young Billy Graham to turn from his ecumenical adventures. In her biography of John Rice, Viola Walden, who was Rice's faithful secretary for 46 years, testified that Dr. Rice greatly loved Graham and repeatedly tried to reason with him (Walden, John R. Rice, pp. 164-167). Graham and Rice met in Scotland in 1955, and Graham assured the elder evangelist:
"I have promised God I will never have on my committee working in an active way in any of my campaigns men who do not believe in the virgin birth of Christ, who do not believe in the blood atonement of Jesus Christ, who do not believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible--these men will never be on my committee. I have promised God" (Graham, cited by Pastor Roland Rasmussen, Reasons Why I Cannot Support Billy Graham, chapel message delivered at Bob Jones University, Feb. 15, 1966).
As it became obvious that Graham was not following his own counsel but was pursuing the ecumenical course, Rice met with him again and urged him to obey the Bible: "I visited Dr. Graham in his own home in Montreat, North Carolina, by his invitation, and we talked earnestly on such matters" (John Rice, Sword of the Lord, June 20, 1958).
Graham, of course, did not listen, and John Rice publicly disassociated himself and the Sword from the young evangelist in 1957. Viola Walden notes that far from having a mean attitude toward Graham, Dr. Rice "prayed regularly [for Graham] even long after denouncing his compromise" and "rejoiced over the many saved in Dr. Graham's crusades" (pp. 166,167).
Thus Dr. John Rice lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. BOB JONES, SR., first met Billy Graham when the elder evangelist came to Charlotte, North Carolina, for a gospel meeting during Graham's senior year in high school. Billy's father, Frank, was impressed with Jones and wanted his son to attend Bob Jones College in Tennessee. (The school moved to Greenville, South Carolina, in 1946, and the name was changed to Bob Jones University). Billy did attend Bob Jones the fall after he graduated from high school (1936), but he did not fit in well with the strict atmosphere of discipline and he soon moved on to the Florida Bible Institute and then to Wheaton in 1940 (from whence he graduated--with a degree in anthropology!). Dr. Bob Jones supported Graham during his early years, and Graham even wrote to Jones to say that he got his evangelistic burden at Bob Jones College and he wanted to be called one of Dr. Jones's "preacher boys" (Bob Jones, Sr., letter to a supporter, March 6, 1957). As Graham began to launch out on his career of yoking together with false teachers, Dr. Jones corresponded with him and reproved him for his compromise. At first, Graham claimed that he had no intention of working with Modernists or Catholics. On June 3, 1952, Graham told Jones, "The modernists do not support us anywhere." It was not long, though, before Graham openly practiced what he privately denied. His 1957 New York Crusade included 120 Modernists on the committee.
Thus Dr. Bob Jones lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. CHARLES WOODBRIDGE was another prominent Christian leader who attempted to correct Billy Graham. Woodbridge had been a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary and a member of the National Association of Evangelicals, before he rejected the New Evangelicalism that was taking over in that day and separated himself from this false philosophy. Woodbridge was a highly educated Presbyterian, with an MA from Princeton, a Ph.D. from Duke, and further studies at Berlin and Marburg Universities in Germany and the Sorbonne in Paris. In his classic book The New Evangelicalism, Woodbridge relates a visit that Graham made to his home in 1958:
"Dr. Graham came to my home in Altadena, California, in 1958 to chat with me about these things. We talked for two hours. I pointed out to him Romans 16:17. I did my best to persuade him to come out from among unbelievers, so far as the conduct of his campaigns was concerned. But to no avail" (Woodbridge, The New Evangelicalism, 1970, p. 44).
Thus Dr. Woodbridge lovingly warned Billy Graham.
JACK WYRTZEN, founder of Word of Life, also warned Graham. The following testimony is from a pastor who witnessed one of the meetings in which Fundamentalist leaders tried to correct Billy Graham:
"In 1957, I sat in a meeting where Jack Wyrtzen and Dr. Woodbridge spoke face to face with Billy Graham about his compromise and the direction he was heading away from Fundamentalism. Billy Graham was at Word of Life Inn for two days of meetings near Schroon Lake, New York. That fall was the 'great New York Crusade.' It was following that meeting that both Dr. Woodbridge and Jack Wyrtzen stopped all support and fellowship with Billy Graham. Dr. Wyrtzen spoke to the staff of WOL regarding his reasons for pulling away from Graham. I was a young Christian at the time (saved at Word of Life on June 24, 1956, at 19 years of age.) It was the next year that Dr. Woodbridge broke fellowship with Dr. Graham for the same reasons" (E-mail dated Feb. 27, 1999, from Pastor Bob Welch, D.Min, Collegegate Baptist Church, Anchorage, Alaska).
Thus Jack Wyrtzen lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. ROBERT KETCHAM was the leader of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches in 1950 when he saw some news clippings stating that Graham was working with Jews and Catholics in his meetings and was turning decision cards over to Catholic parishes. Ketcham wrote immediately to Graham and asked if the reports were true. The reply from Graham's executive secretary, Jerry Bevan, included the following:
'For example, you asked if Billy Graham had invited Roman Catholics and Jews to cooperate in the evangelistic meetings. SUCH A THOUGHT, EVEN IF THE REPORTER DID SUGGEST IT AS HAVING COME FROM MR. GRAHAM, SEEMS RIDICULOUS TO ME. SURELY YOU MUST KNOW THAT IT IS NOT TRUE. ... FURTHER, THAT YOU SHOULD GIVE ANY CREDENCE TO THE IDEA THAT MR. GRAHAM WOULD EVER TURN OVER ANY DECISION CARDS TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH SEEMS INCONCEIVABLE' (John Ashbrook, New Neutralism II).
It was not long until Bevan's reply was proven a deception. Graham was intent upon working with Modernistic and Catholic and Jewish leaders, and he was intending to turn decision cards over to the same. The point here, though, is that Dr. Ketcham approached Billy Graham directly about this matter.
Another Christian leader who warned Graham was the late WILSON EWIN, longtime missionary to Roman Catholic-dominated Quebec. Graham cannot say that Ewin did not understand Roman Catholicism or Catholic evangelism. Unlike Graham, who travels from place to place and preaches largely in formal, organized settings, then returns to the seclusion of his hotel suite, Ewin lived among Roman Catholics and worked with them as a pastor and evangelist day by day, month by month, decade after decade. He dedicated his book You Can Lead Roman Catholics to Christ to "the salvation of dear Roman Catholics whom I love and for whom our Saviour died and shed His Blood."
"For twenty years, I have watched the crusades and ministry of Dr. Billy Graham. In fact, Ruth [Ewin's wife] and I sang in the choir and were counselors in one of the Graham crusades. Many letters were written to Billy expressing grave concern about his illicit affair with the Roman Catholic system. I even visited his evangelistic headquarters in Minneapolis to alert the Graham Organization about its overt compromise with Roman Catholicism. Graham has indeed allowed the truth to fall into the street through his ecumenical ministry" (Wilson Ewin, prayer letter announcing his book The Assimilation of Evangelist Billy Graham into the Roman Catholic Church, January 1993).
Thus Wilson Ewin lovingly warned Billy Graham.
These are only a few of the men who attempted to reprove Graham for his error. Graham mentioned these warnings in his biography.
"Much more painful to me, however, was the opposition from some of the leading fundamentalists. Most of them I knew personally, and even if I did not agree with them on every detail, I greatly admired them and respected their commitment to Christ. Many also had been among our strongest supporters in the early years of our public ministry. Their criticisms hurt immensely, nor could I shrug them off as the objections of people who rejected the basic tenets of the Christian faith or who opposed evangelism of any type" (Graham, Just As I Am, p. 302).
Graham also called the criticism "harsh" and claimed that the men who criticized him demonstrated "a lack of love," but the disobedient always say that no matter how tender and loving the rebukes are. They always confuse correction with persecution. It is human nature to do that, and it raises a smokescreen to hide the real issues.
Reproof is never an easy thing to receive, and it always seems to be unloving to those who refuse to accept it. Further, one can always find some fault in the reprover, because he or she is also a sinner. Proverbs teaches that one's attitude toward biblical reproof exposes the condition of the heart.
"He is in the way of life that keepeth instruction: but he that refuseth reproof erreth" (Prov. 10:17).
"The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise. He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getting understanding" (Prov. 16:32).
Billy Graham did not have a proper attitude toward biblical reproof. He refused to turn from the path of disobedience, and he slandered those who have loved him and God's Word enough to attempt to correct him.
Billy Graham was warned. He had many opportunities to repent. Sadly, he clung steadfastly to the course of disobedience to God’s Word, and no other man in his generation was more responsible than Billy Graham for breaking down the walls between truth and error.
For more on this see, Billy Graham’s Sad Disobedience, available as a free eBook from www.wayoflife.org.
The answer is no, I did not. I had no means of doing so. All of Dr. Graham's correspondence was filtered through his massive organization. I did not have the ear of Billy Graham.
I didn’t need to warn him, though. This was done repeatedly by men who had the opportunity to do so. We need to state emphatically that Dr. Billy Graham was warned many times for his disobedience to God's Word. In the early days of his compromise, Graham was warned by prominent Christian leaders such as Bob Jones, Sr., John R. Rice, Robert Shuler, G. Archer Weniger, James Bennet, Carl McIntire, Bryce Augsburger, Charles Woodbridge, and Robert Ketcham.
IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT BILLY GRAHAM IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS A FUNDAMENTALIST WHEN HE BEGAN PREACHING. He attended the fundamentalist Bob Jones College (later named Bob Jones University) and counted himself one of Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.'s preacher boys. Graham associate Cliff Barrows was a Bob Jones graduate. Graham interviewed Dr. Bob Jones, Jr., on his Hour of Decision radio broadcast in December 1951, and concluded by saying:
"It's wonderful in these days of secular and materialistic education to see a great University that stands for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not only old-fashioned Americanism that we so desperately need today, but is injecting into our society your men and women that take their stand for the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Billy Graham, radio broadcast, Bob Jones University, Dec. 1951).
Billy Graham, who has been called "Mr. Facing Two Ways," was already moving in a completely different direction from Bob Jones even as he was uttering this effusive praise. Graham was also on the Cooperating Board of John Rice's The Sword of the Lord. From December 1947 to 1952, Graham was also president of Northwestern Schools (founded by famous Fundamentalist leader William Bell Riley) and was editor of that school's Fundamentalist publication, The Pilot, the masthead of which boldly proclaimed a "militant stand against Modernism in every form." During his early years, Graham was awarded honorary doctorates from Northwestern and Bob Jones.
Writing in the April 1951 issue of The Pilot, the magazine of the Northwestern Schools, Graham said, “We do not condone nor have fellowship with any form of modernism.” Within six years, he was having fellowship with the rankest modernists alive in his New York City crusade.
Consider some of the men who personally pleaded with Graham to turn from his unscriptural path:
JAMES BENNET was a prominent New York attorney and Bible teacher who knew Billy Graham from the time he graduated from Wheaton. He encouraged Graham during the early years of his ministry, but when Graham began openly yoking together with Modernists and Catholics, Bennet attempted to turn him from this error. He met with Graham in New York City before the 1954 crusade and pleaded with him not to proceed with his ecumenical plans. When Graham refused to obey the Word of God, Bennet resigned from the campaign invitation committee and wrote a public warning about the direction Graham was pursuing (James E. Bennet, The Billy Graham New York Crusade: Why I Cannot Support It, A Ministry of Disobedience, Collingswood, NJ: Christian Beacon Press, May-September 1957).
Thus James Bennet lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. JOHN R. RICE, editor of the influential Sword of the Lord weekly Fundamental Baptist paper, also supported Graham during his early years. In fact, Graham was on the Cooperating Board of the Sword. Dr. Rice was a very loving and gracious Christian gentleman, and he pleaded with the young Billy Graham to turn from his ecumenical adventures. In her biography of John Rice, Viola Walden, who was Rice's faithful secretary for 46 years, testified that Dr. Rice greatly loved Graham and repeatedly tried to reason with him (Walden, John R. Rice, pp. 164-167). Graham and Rice met in Scotland in 1955, and Graham assured the elder evangelist:
"I have promised God I will never have on my committee working in an active way in any of my campaigns men who do not believe in the virgin birth of Christ, who do not believe in the blood atonement of Jesus Christ, who do not believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible--these men will never be on my committee. I have promised God" (Graham, cited by Pastor Roland Rasmussen, Reasons Why I Cannot Support Billy Graham, chapel message delivered at Bob Jones University, Feb. 15, 1966).
As it became obvious that Graham was not following his own counsel but was pursuing the ecumenical course, Rice met with him again and urged him to obey the Bible: "I visited Dr. Graham in his own home in Montreat, North Carolina, by his invitation, and we talked earnestly on such matters" (John Rice, Sword of the Lord, June 20, 1958).
Graham, of course, did not listen, and John Rice publicly disassociated himself and the Sword from the young evangelist in 1957. Viola Walden notes that far from having a mean attitude toward Graham, Dr. Rice "prayed regularly [for Graham] even long after denouncing his compromise" and "rejoiced over the many saved in Dr. Graham's crusades" (pp. 166,167).
Thus Dr. John Rice lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. BOB JONES, SR., first met Billy Graham when the elder evangelist came to Charlotte, North Carolina, for a gospel meeting during Graham's senior year in high school. Billy's father, Frank, was impressed with Jones and wanted his son to attend Bob Jones College in Tennessee. (The school moved to Greenville, South Carolina, in 1946, and the name was changed to Bob Jones University). Billy did attend Bob Jones the fall after he graduated from high school (1936), but he did not fit in well with the strict atmosphere of discipline and he soon moved on to the Florida Bible Institute and then to Wheaton in 1940 (from whence he graduated--with a degree in anthropology!). Dr. Bob Jones supported Graham during his early years, and Graham even wrote to Jones to say that he got his evangelistic burden at Bob Jones College and he wanted to be called one of Dr. Jones's "preacher boys" (Bob Jones, Sr., letter to a supporter, March 6, 1957). As Graham began to launch out on his career of yoking together with false teachers, Dr. Jones corresponded with him and reproved him for his compromise. At first, Graham claimed that he had no intention of working with Modernists or Catholics. On June 3, 1952, Graham told Jones, "The modernists do not support us anywhere." It was not long, though, before Graham openly practiced what he privately denied. His 1957 New York Crusade included 120 Modernists on the committee.
Thus Dr. Bob Jones lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. CHARLES WOODBRIDGE was another prominent Christian leader who attempted to correct Billy Graham. Woodbridge had been a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary and a member of the National Association of Evangelicals, before he rejected the New Evangelicalism that was taking over in that day and separated himself from this false philosophy. Woodbridge was a highly educated Presbyterian, with an MA from Princeton, a Ph.D. from Duke, and further studies at Berlin and Marburg Universities in Germany and the Sorbonne in Paris. In his classic book The New Evangelicalism, Woodbridge relates a visit that Graham made to his home in 1958:
"Dr. Graham came to my home in Altadena, California, in 1958 to chat with me about these things. We talked for two hours. I pointed out to him Romans 16:17. I did my best to persuade him to come out from among unbelievers, so far as the conduct of his campaigns was concerned. But to no avail" (Woodbridge, The New Evangelicalism, 1970, p. 44).
Thus Dr. Woodbridge lovingly warned Billy Graham.
JACK WYRTZEN, founder of Word of Life, also warned Graham. The following testimony is from a pastor who witnessed one of the meetings in which Fundamentalist leaders tried to correct Billy Graham:
"In 1957, I sat in a meeting where Jack Wyrtzen and Dr. Woodbridge spoke face to face with Billy Graham about his compromise and the direction he was heading away from Fundamentalism. Billy Graham was at Word of Life Inn for two days of meetings near Schroon Lake, New York. That fall was the 'great New York Crusade.' It was following that meeting that both Dr. Woodbridge and Jack Wyrtzen stopped all support and fellowship with Billy Graham. Dr. Wyrtzen spoke to the staff of WOL regarding his reasons for pulling away from Graham. I was a young Christian at the time (saved at Word of Life on June 24, 1956, at 19 years of age.) It was the next year that Dr. Woodbridge broke fellowship with Dr. Graham for the same reasons" (E-mail dated Feb. 27, 1999, from Pastor Bob Welch, D.Min, Collegegate Baptist Church, Anchorage, Alaska).
Thus Jack Wyrtzen lovingly warned Billy Graham.
DR. ROBERT KETCHAM was the leader of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches in 1950 when he saw some news clippings stating that Graham was working with Jews and Catholics in his meetings and was turning decision cards over to Catholic parishes. Ketcham wrote immediately to Graham and asked if the reports were true. The reply from Graham's executive secretary, Jerry Bevan, included the following:
'For example, you asked if Billy Graham had invited Roman Catholics and Jews to cooperate in the evangelistic meetings. SUCH A THOUGHT, EVEN IF THE REPORTER DID SUGGEST IT AS HAVING COME FROM MR. GRAHAM, SEEMS RIDICULOUS TO ME. SURELY YOU MUST KNOW THAT IT IS NOT TRUE. ... FURTHER, THAT YOU SHOULD GIVE ANY CREDENCE TO THE IDEA THAT MR. GRAHAM WOULD EVER TURN OVER ANY DECISION CARDS TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH SEEMS INCONCEIVABLE' (John Ashbrook, New Neutralism II).
It was not long until Bevan's reply was proven a deception. Graham was intent upon working with Modernistic and Catholic and Jewish leaders, and he was intending to turn decision cards over to the same. The point here, though, is that Dr. Ketcham approached Billy Graham directly about this matter.
Another Christian leader who warned Graham was the late WILSON EWIN, longtime missionary to Roman Catholic-dominated Quebec. Graham cannot say that Ewin did not understand Roman Catholicism or Catholic evangelism. Unlike Graham, who travels from place to place and preaches largely in formal, organized settings, then returns to the seclusion of his hotel suite, Ewin lived among Roman Catholics and worked with them as a pastor and evangelist day by day, month by month, decade after decade. He dedicated his book You Can Lead Roman Catholics to Christ to "the salvation of dear Roman Catholics whom I love and for whom our Saviour died and shed His Blood."
"For twenty years, I have watched the crusades and ministry of Dr. Billy Graham. In fact, Ruth [Ewin's wife] and I sang in the choir and were counselors in one of the Graham crusades. Many letters were written to Billy expressing grave concern about his illicit affair with the Roman Catholic system. I even visited his evangelistic headquarters in Minneapolis to alert the Graham Organization about its overt compromise with Roman Catholicism. Graham has indeed allowed the truth to fall into the street through his ecumenical ministry" (Wilson Ewin, prayer letter announcing his book The Assimilation of Evangelist Billy Graham into the Roman Catholic Church, January 1993).
Thus Wilson Ewin lovingly warned Billy Graham.
These are only a few of the men who attempted to reprove Graham for his error. Graham mentioned these warnings in his biography.
"Much more painful to me, however, was the opposition from some of the leading fundamentalists. Most of them I knew personally, and even if I did not agree with them on every detail, I greatly admired them and respected their commitment to Christ. Many also had been among our strongest supporters in the early years of our public ministry. Their criticisms hurt immensely, nor could I shrug them off as the objections of people who rejected the basic tenets of the Christian faith or who opposed evangelism of any type" (Graham, Just As I Am, p. 302).
Graham also called the criticism "harsh" and claimed that the men who criticized him demonstrated "a lack of love," but the disobedient always say that no matter how tender and loving the rebukes are. They always confuse correction with persecution. It is human nature to do that, and it raises a smokescreen to hide the real issues.
Reproof is never an easy thing to receive, and it always seems to be unloving to those who refuse to accept it. Further, one can always find some fault in the reprover, because he or she is also a sinner. Proverbs teaches that one's attitude toward biblical reproof exposes the condition of the heart.
"He is in the way of life that keepeth instruction: but he that refuseth reproof erreth" (Prov. 10:17).
"The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise. He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getting understanding" (Prov. 16:32).
Billy Graham did not have a proper attitude toward biblical reproof. He refused to turn from the path of disobedience, and he slandered those who have loved him and God's Word enough to attempt to correct him.
Billy Graham was warned. He had many opportunities to repent. Sadly, he clung steadfastly to the course of disobedience to God’s Word, and no other man in his generation was more responsible than Billy Graham for breaking down the walls between truth and error.
For more on this see, Billy Graham’s Sad Disobedience, available as a free eBook from www.wayoflife.org.
+ Way of Life Literature, Post
Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
The Trinity
Review has published "The Bible and the Idolatry of Science, Part 1" by
Ronald L. Cooper which addresses the idolatrous place that science has taken in
the church and other Christian organizations.
+ The
Trinity Foundation, Post Office Box 68, Unicoi,
Tennessee 37692, 423-743-0199, Fax:
423-743-2005, tjtrinityfound@aol.com
