Billy Graham

[MarieA27]

As far as I know, Billy Graham is lost, and is sadly going to hell. He knew about the gospel, knew how to be saved, and rejected it. I find it troublesome to spend that many years, supposedly living a life for Christ and bringing others to do the same, and then to be lost. All due to you not wanting to give up the fame, prestige, and caring more for the cares of this world, than for a true bible salvation.

When Bishop S.C. Johnson was alive, I remember several messages of him preaching regarding Billy Graham. Talked about the letters regarding biblical teachings, that they wrote back and forth on. Bishop Johnson said that he would tell Billy Graham about being baptized and receiving the holy ghost, and going on to perfection, and ask Billy where in the Bible did it teach the “Hour of Decision”. Billy Graham said that he didn’t believe what he taught about salvation, with Bishop Johnson responding back that what he taught was in the Bible, so what didn't he agree with?

So he knew about having to be baptized in Jesus name, receiving the Holy Ghost, living a holy, repentive and sanctified life in Christ, and said he didn’t believe it, or see things that way.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by MarieA27

As far as I know, Billy Graham is lost, and is sadly going to hell. He knew about the gospel, knew how to be saved, and rejected it. I find it troublesome to spend that many years, supposedly living a life for Christ and bringing others to do the same, and then to be lost. All due to you not wanting to give up the fame, prestige, and caring more for the cares of this world, than for a true bible salvation.

When Bishop S.C. Johnson was alive, I remember several messages of him preaching regarding Billy Graham. Talked about the letters regarding biblical teachings, that they wrote back and forth on. Bishop Johnson said that he would tell Billy Graham about being baptized and receiving the holy ghost, and going on to perfection, and ask Billy where in the Bible did it teach the “Hour of Decision”. Billy Graham said that he didn’t believe what he taught about salvation, with Bishop Johnson responding back that what he taught was in the Bible, so what didn't he agree with?

So he knew about having to be baptized in Jesus name, receiving the Holy Ghost, living a holy, repentive and sanctified life in Christ, and said he didn’t believe it, or see things that way.

2 Corinthians 4:3-4 King James Version (KJV)
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

I'm hesitant to receive such reports. I remember hearing of a man claiming to have baptized Bin Laden's family or something back in the day. lol

But... let's assume this IS indeed true...

If so, I sadly, I concur with you that we most likely will not see Graham in Heaven. But what is at issue here is the notion of allowing God to be judge.

This is where my position is also rather valuable. Let's say that as we look over Billy Graham's experience, faith, and understanding we determine that Graham was lost. Now, let's take into an account that Billy was beloved by millions around the world, perhaps even billions. I have no doubt that Satan is licking his chops just waiting on Apostolics to condemn Graham as being a Hell bound false teacher. Why? Because Satan can use that to marginalize the truth even more before a lost world that truly doesn't know their right hand from their left.

In my position, you and I can both agree that Graham is lost. However, when dealing with the issue publically before this lost world, we can simply profess that Graham will be judged by God and God alone. What we must focus on is what the Scriptures teach, which is the fullness of Acts 2:38. I sometimes think the deaths of these "great men" are setups to bring the Apostolics out of the wood work, to discredit our message.

In this respect, it becomes more of an attitude of approach. Not a definitive teaching or doctrine. We give all souls to God to judge, especially those who profess to be Christians. But we are constrained to preach the fullness of New Testament Salvation. In doing this, we side step the trap of the devil.

He that winneth souls is wise.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Who said it isn't "salvific"? Where did that notion come from? Is that in Scripture? Did let's say, Paul, have a different eschatology than, let's say, Peter? Where is the Scriptural foundation of such an idea?

Or are we assuming that God will have mercy on the teachers of a false teaching?

First, there's no scripture equating views on eschatology to salvation. None.

Second, if eschatology is salvific and your belief in preterism is wrong -- you accept hell and damnation over that?

Third, oh legalism...

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

because Billy didn't know the fullness of biblical truth.

Billy didn't know the fullness of biblical truth? Says who?

I find it incredibly unbelievable that Billy never read about the new birth. That he didn't know about it. That after preaching and studying over half a century he never knew about water baptism and the HG.

Sorry, Aquila. Billy rejected the Gospel. EB was right, if your initial post is true, Heaven is an absolute mess. And I would add that, if true, there is no wrong or right plan of salvation. One may believe whatever they wish and still receive their eternal reward.

[consapente89]

I heard Billy Graham as a 9 year old boy and was convinced by his preaching that I was a sinner going to hell and needed a savior. I later embraced the truth of the Gospel and was born again via Acts 2:38. I remember the night with fondness that I heard Billy Graham and realized that I needed Jesus. Yet I shudder to think that I could have stopped there, believing myself to be saved, and still be lost today. Did God use Billy Graham to reach a truly hungry heart at times? No doubt he did. However, a lot more people were deceived with his message, believing themselves to be saved at one of his meetings. Many more will stand before God realizing their "salvation" was a false security because of this man's "ministry" than there will be that stand before God because Billy Graham's message was a "stepping stone" in their life, leading them to greater truth.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

In my position, you and I can both agree that Graham is lost. However, when dealing with the issue publicly before this lost world, we can simply profess that Graham will be judged by God and God alone. What we must focus on is what the Scriptures teach, which is the fullness of Acts 2:38. I sometimes think the deaths of these "great men" are setups to bring the Apostolics out of the wood work, to discredit our message.

Why the need to believe one way among ourselves, but another way with the public? It doesn't discredit our message to be consistent and say "this is what the Bible says."

What discredits the message is waffling and saying, "well, we believe Acts 2:38 is what the Bible says, buuuut it's cool if Billy or others ignore it and believe what they wish to believe."

We don't need to take a public opinion poll to gauge how our message will resonate with the lost.

The Bible is absolutely clear and we must be also.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

First, there's no scripture equating views on eschatology to salvation. None.

Second, if eschatology is salvific and your belief in preterism is wrong -- you accept hell and damnation over that?

I'd have to. I don't have a choice.

The issue is falsehood. False doctrine. If something isn't true, or biblical, it is a false teaching. Can one be a perpetrator of false teaching and go to Heaven? Doesn't the Bible clearly indicate that teaching a false teaching or believing in a false teaching alienates one from God?

To me, it's "not rocket science". Details within the text itself demand a Preterist conclusion. Therefore, any teaching beyond that would be a false teaching, would it not?

My question is, do we give a free pass on false teaching and the teachers of false teachings (false prophets)... just because it falls into the category of eschatology? On what biblical grounds can we do this?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Billy didn't know the fullness of biblical truth? Says who?

I find it incredibly unbelievable that Billy never read about the new birth. That he didn't know about it. That after preaching and studying over half a century he never knew about water baptism and the HG.

Sorry, Aquila. Billy rejected the Gospel. EB was right, if your initial post is true, Heaven is an absolute mess. And I would add that, if true, there is no wrong or right plan of salvation. One may believe whatever they wish and still receive their eternal reward.

I think we can all agree that Graham will most likely NOT be in Heaven. Although, I don't desire to see any man go to Hell, especially just to prove me "right" or anything like that. But if what I've been learning about him is true... he did have a chance... and rejected it. That's far different from the sincere faith of those entrapped in tradition who have sincerely only obeyed a part of Acts 2:38 that I'm mostly concerned about. At this point, as it relates to Graham, my position would simply be one of an attitude, a diplomatic answer, so as not to play into the Devil's hand wherein he will use anything to turn one off from the Gospel.

How would Heaven be a "mess" if God Himself sovereignly chose anyone outside of Acts 2:38. If anything, He'd be praised for His sovereign mercy upon sincere souls who were entangled in tradition.

Please note, we use a Bible that was preserved by, printed by, proliferated by, and translated by... Trinitarians. From the Bible, to music, to style, to commentary, we borrow their stuff... and then condemn them. That's a bit odd to me.

If one will not give a glass of water in Christ's name without losing their reward... how much more reward would one who faithfully preserved, translated, and printed the Scriptures receive?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Why the need to believe one way among ourselves, but another way with the public? It doesn't discredit our message to be consistent and say "this is what the Bible says."

What discredits the message is waffling and saying, "well, we believe Acts 2:38 is what the Bible says, buuuut it's cool if Billy or others ignore it and believe what they wish to believe."

We don't need to take a public opinion poll to gauge how our message will resonate with the lost.

The Bible is absolutely clear and we must be also.

I'm just saying, it never hurts to use wisdom.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'd have to. I don't have a choice.

The issue is falsehood. False doctrine. If something isn't true, or biblical, it is a false teaching. Can one be a perpetrator of false teaching and go to Heaven? Doesn't the Bible clearly indicate that teaching a false teaching or believing in a false teaching alienates one from God?

To me, it's "not rocket science". Details within the text itself demand a Preterist conclusion. Therefore, any teaching beyond that would be a false teaching, would it not?

My question is, do we give a free pass on false teaching and the teachers of false teachings (false prophets)... just because it falls into the category of eschatology? On what biblical grounds can we do this?

There is no doctrine of eschatology. You're safe.