Get E-Mail Updates

Billy Graham's Theological Humility Should Challenge Evangelical Attitudes

Every three years, young evangelists from around the world gather in Portland Oregon to attend a conference put on by the Next Generation Alliance, an organization dedicated to mentoring the next generation of global gospel preachers. While I'm looking forward to the Innovative Evangelism Conference next week, I think a serious reflection on the man that most of us attending the conference draw the bulk of our inspiration from-Billy Graham-is in order.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

The typical Billy Graham narrative goes something like this. Billy started his ministry as a self-assured fundamentalist. In the early days of his ministry, preaching the gospel went hand in hand with defeating communism. Eventually Graham's championing of the Vietnam War and his close association with Richard Nixon caught up with him and he got burned, resulting in a crisis of faith that produced a much gentler and wiser Billy Graham.

As familiar as this story is, I think it's a mistake to reduce Graham's metamorphosis to pre-Nixon and post-Nixon-as if the only thing Graham learned in his older age was that it's a mistake to politicize the gospel. Such an oversimplification of Graham's life and ministry overlooks a key aspect of Billy Graham's legacy: a middle ground between fundamentalism and theological liberalism.

Take for example two issues that have become litmus tests for orthodoxy among Biblical fundamentalists-evolution and the fate of the unevangelized on judgment day. On the subject of evolution, Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book, and shouldn't be read as such. (See Billy Graham: Personal Thoughts of a Public Man, by David Frost, p 73.) On this matter Graham is further to the left than the average evangelical, although his Biblical hermeneutic on the rest of the Scriptures remain a far cry from theological liberalism (For example: Graham may see the seven days of Genesis as figurative, but he maintains that Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale).

The same can be said for Billy Graham's agnostic position on the fate of the unevangelized on judgment day. When asked by Newsweek if he felt that heaven would be open to people of other faiths besides Christianity, Billy Graham responded,

Those are decisions only the Lord will make. It would be foolish for me to speculate on who will be there and who won't ... I don't want to speculate about all that. I believe the love of God is absolute. He said he gave his son for the whole world, and I think he loves everybody regardless of what label they have.

Some have even attributed his comments-and other comments like these-to senility. Still others have written him off as a heretic. Again, the reality is more complex. Billy Graham has never wavered in his belief that Christ's death and resurrection is the only means by which a person can be saved, and neither does he apologize for his commitment to preach the gospel for the conversion of sinners to Christ. What the older Billy Graham has learned, however, is that a person can be resolute in their commitment to the gospel and be theologically humble at the same time.

Ironically, it's Billy's example of theological humility that may free the next generation to ask some hard questions about the classic evangelical gospel that he popularized. For example, does the classic evangelical gospel, complete with an altar call and the standard sinner's prayer, take seriously enough the teachings of Jesus against accumulating wealth and earthly possessions? To what extent should non-violence and identification with the poor be proclaimed as part of the gospel of the Kingdom? Has the sinner's prayer been overemphasized at the expense of baptism as the initiation into the Body of Christ?

These are difficult questions with no easy answers, which is why the next generation of evangelists could use a dose of Billy Graham's theological humility. Billy Graham has served his generation faithfully, but even Billy knows that he doesn't have a corner on truth-and neither will the next generation that follows in his footsteps. Billy Graham has led the way, but now it's up to us, the next generation, to carry the mantle and hear what the Spirit is saying to our world today. I think Billy would agree.

portrait-aaron-taylorAaron D. Taylor is the author ofAlone with A Jihadist: A Biblical Response To Holy War. To learn more about Aaron's ministry, go to www.aarondtaylor.com. To follow Aaron on Twitter, go to www.twitter.com/aarondtaylor. Aaron can be contacted at fromdeathtolife@gmail.com.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-05-2009 @ 4:22pm

No question, hammerud. Amen.

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-05-2009 @ 4:22pm

No question, hammerud. Amen.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 5:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 5:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 7:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 12:23pm

Aaron, have you ever watched or attended a Billy Graham crusade? Right up to the end, he was preaching that dying without consciously accepting Jesus as one's savior would result in eternal separation from God. This "theological humility" is an act, or a facet of his personality he turns on during an interview. I don't believe for a moment that he believes there will be persons of other faiths, or of no faith, in heaven.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 12:23pm

Aaron, have you ever watched or attended a Billy Graham crusade? Right up to the end, he was preaching that dying without consciously accepting Jesus as one's savior would result in eternal separation from God. This "theological humility" is an act, or a facet of his personality he turns on during an interview. I don't believe for a moment that he believes there will be persons of other faiths, or of no faith, in heaven.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:08pm

If you re-read the statement you will note there is no contradiction.

He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling.

Maybe he is truly humble--able to take hold of what he believes he is accountable for--and able to let go of that which he understands to rest in God's hands.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:16pm

"He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling."

Right - and my point is that is not what he used to say from the pulpit, even during the later years when he had become more "liberal".

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:26pm

I guess my point was not complete. It is not a contradiction to assert that and still hold that a reconciled, saving, relationship with God comes solely through the provision of Jesus for which we make a willful decision.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:08pm

If you re-read the statement you will note there is no contradiction.

He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling.

Maybe he is truly humble--able to take hold of what he believes he is accountable for--and able to let go of that which he understands to rest in God's hands.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:28pm

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. That isn't what's being said here.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:16pm

"He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling."

Right - and my point is that is not what he used to say from the pulpit, even during the later years when he had become more "liberal".

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:26pm

I guess my point was not complete. It is not a contradiction to assert that and still hold that a reconciled, saving, relationship with God comes solely through the provision of Jesus for which we make a willful decision.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:28pm

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. That isn't what's being said here.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 11:45pm

Since I'm so mistaken--do you mind explaining just a wee bit more so I can see the error?

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 11:45pm

Since I'm so mistaken--do you mind explaining just a wee bit more so I can see the error?

by: abasch

11-03-2009 @ 5:36pm

I like Billy Grahams theological humility. It is important that we know are role, which is not to judge a persons eternal soul, but to lead them to God. Only God is authorized to judge the soul.

With that said, the Scriptures make it clear that only through faith in Jesus Christ can a person be saved and enter heaven.

I also wonder about questions such as what about people who never hear the gospel, Jews that died in the holocaust, kids that die before an "age of accountability". These are answers that we do not have, but we can trust that God in His goodness, is way more good than we would be in this situations. So I personally have peace there.

As far as evolution, I think we need to start educating ourselves more and more, learn more about the different types of evolution.
Evolution is a scientific fact, but it has not been adequately proven that the human species originated from evolution rather than being created. Again, if these answers and topics were easy, they would be, well, easy! We should still be careful not to accept as fact something that happened in prehistory that we know little about. I know one could say the same thing about creation, but I personally find creation more believable.

There will be people in heaven who believed in evolution (the origin of our species type of evolution), so it isnt the most important topic, but I am sticking to creation as it is written in Genesis, humbly.

by: uberVU - social comments

11-03-2009 @ 7:55pm

Social comments and analytics for this post...

This post was mentioned on Twitter by craigadams49: RT @Sojourners: Billy Graham has maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. http://bit.ly/24rY6M...

by: abasch

11-03-2009 @ 5:36pm

I like Billy Grahams theological humility. It is important that we know are role, which is not to judge a persons eternal soul, but to lead them to God. Only God is authorized to judge the soul.

With that said, the Scriptures make it clear that only through faith in Jesus Christ can a person be saved and enter heaven.

I also wonder about questions such as what about people who never hear the gospel, Jews that died in the holocaust, kids that die before an "age of accountability". These are answers that we do not have, but we can trust that God in His goodness, is way more good than we would be in this situations. So I personally have peace there.

As far as evolution, I think we need to start educating ourselves more and more, learn more about the different types of evolution.
Evolution is a scientific fact, but it has not been adequately proven that the human species originated from evolution rather than being created. Again, if these answers and topics were easy, they would be, well, easy! We should still be careful not to accept as fact something that happened in prehistory that we know little about. I know one could say the same thing about creation, but I personally find creation more believable.

There will be people in heaven who believed in evolution (the origin of our species type of evolution), so it isnt the most important topic, but I am sticking to creation as it is written in Genesis, humbly.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-03-2009 @ 6:27pm

Al Tizon from Evangelicals for Social Action has a new book out ( http://wipfandstock.com/store/Transformation_af... ) basically arguing that an Evangelicalism of transformation has "won the day" over a strictly personal conversion theology (I don't know if he would buy my summary of his argument). And that this turn of focus hinged on the '74 Lausanne event -- the direct fruit of Dr. Graham.

In a sense his humility and selflessness disguise much of the impact he has had; and remind me our lives and relationship ought bear the markings of Jesus.

Many preached conversion. Many preached crossing the divisions of the world to love our neighbors. He did those things--without raising himself up to say, "I will now tear down the walls of East and West, etc."

He really is a great example how we can both be trapped in our culture and also be formed by Christ within it and be used in quite revolutionary ways--even beyond our intent and imagingation--if we allow the transforming power of God to have access.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-03-2009 @ 6:27pm

Al Tizon from Evangelicals for Social Action has a new book out ( http://wipfandstock.com/store/Transformation_af... ) basically arguing that an Evangelicalism of transformation has "won the day" over a strictly personal conversion theology (I don't know if he would buy my summary of his argument). And that this turn of focus hinged on the '74 Lausanne event -- the direct fruit of Dr. Graham.

In a sense his humility and selflessness disguise much of the impact he has had; and remind me our lives and relationship ought bear the markings of Jesus.

Many preached conversion. Many preached crossing the divisions of the world to love our neighbors. He did those things--without raising himself up to say, "I will now tear down the walls of East and West, etc."

He really is a great example how we can both be trapped in our culture and also be formed by Christ within it and be used in quite revolutionary ways--even beyond our intent and imagingation--if we allow the transforming power of God to have access.

by: ford49

11-03-2009 @ 7:08pm

Amen, Amen, and Amen!!!! It's Micah 6:8 and Chronicals 7:14 come alive....

by: ford49

11-03-2009 @ 7:08pm

Amen, Amen, and Amen!!!! It's Micah 6:8 and Chronicals 7:14 come alive....

by: Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 7:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: kansasmennonite

11-04-2009 @ 11:04am

What about Franklin Graham? Isn't he a lot more political, fundamental, and divisive? Kind of reminds me of the Schaeffers.

by: kansasmennonite

11-04-2009 @ 11:04am

What about Franklin Graham? Isn't he a lot more political, fundamental, and divisive? Kind of reminds me of the Schaeffers.

by: lizdyer

11-10-2009 @ 6:26pm

I'm a little late jumping in here but I just had to say "it was the religious people that were offended by Jesus"

by: lizdyer

11-10-2009 @ 6:26pm

I'm a little late jumping in here but I just had to say "it was the religious people that were offended by Jesus"

by: hammerud

11-10-2009 @ 7:57pm

It was, but it was also "the world," which includes all of us. Jesus
said, "the world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are
evil." And He also said, "if it hated me, it will hate you." If, as
Christians, our interaction with the world is all nice and sweet, the
message probably isn't being shared.

by: ckgmail

11-04-2009 @ 6:34pm

Abasch, which Genesis creation account are you sticking to?

by: hammerud

11-10-2009 @ 7:57pm

It was, but it was also "the world," which includes all of us. Jesus
said, "the world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are
evil." And He also said, "if it hated me, it will hate you." If, as
Christians, our interaction with the world is all nice and sweet, the
message probably isn't being shared.

by: ckgmail

11-04-2009 @ 6:34pm

Abasch, which Genesis creation account are you sticking to?

by: abasch

11-04-2009 @ 7:30pm

The first chapter

by: abasch

11-04-2009 @ 7:30pm

The first chapter

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-04-2009 @ 9:27pm

I had the pleasure of working with the BGEA on two separate occasions. I cherish them both. At the meetings there was always a woman and a person of color who spoke and/or prayed from the platform. Yes, some of the larger independent churches stayed away. Nevertheless, CHRISTians of every stripe were involved including two Catholic dioceses with reps on the executive board. Record crowds were recorded at the venues and many, many souls rescued from a Christless eternity.

After the attack against us on 9/11, the national day of prayer in Washington was an amazing display of men and women of good will coming to together and speaking in their unique religious voices rather than some vapid universalism; truly America the beautiful. Mr. Graham was unapologetically but gently magnificent in what he said and how he said it.

The opening of the BG Library included speeches from Republican and Democratic US presidents. George Bush #41 was very emotional while speaking of Mr. Graham and Bill Clinton spoke powerfully of how the BGEA stood up to and faced down the Ku Klux Klan in Arkansas.

As far as the kids are concerned, on the night when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, I called Samaritan's Purse to make a donation, to do something. It was very late at night but a young woman answered the phone and took my money. I asked when she thought they would be getting into New Orleans. Her reply? Something akin to "Sir, as we speak there are tracker trailer trucks outside the city waiting for the storm to pass."

No, Franklin is not the speaker let alone the theologian his father is. As Francis of Assisi said: "Preach the Gospel to every creature. Speak if you must." Franklin's sister Anne is, in my humble estimation, the keeper of the evangelist's mantle: intelligent, persuasive, articulate.

God bless Billy Graham.

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-04-2009 @ 9:27pm

I had the pleasure of working with the BGEA on two separate occasions. I cherish them both. At the meetings there was always a woman and a person of color who spoke and/or prayed from the platform. Yes, some of the larger independent churches stayed away. Nevertheless, CHRISTians of every stripe were involved including two Catholic dioceses with reps on the executive board. Record crowds were recorded at the venues and many, many souls rescued from a Christless eternity.

After the attack against us on 9/11, the national day of prayer in Washington was an amazing display of men and women of good will coming to together and speaking in their unique religious voices rather than some vapid universalism; truly America the beautiful. Mr. Graham was unapologetically but gently magnificent in what he said and how he said it.

The opening of the BG Library included speeches from Republican and Democratic US presidents. George Bush #41 was very emotional while speaking of Mr. Graham and Bill Clinton spoke powerfully of how the BGEA stood up to and faced down the Ku Klux Klan in Arkansas.

As far as the kids are concerned, on the night when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, I called Samaritan's Purse to make a donation, to do something. It was very late at night but a young woman answered the phone and took my money. I asked when she thought they would be getting into New Orleans. Her reply? Something akin to "Sir, as we speak there are tracker trailer trucks outside the city waiting for the storm to pass."

No, Franklin is not the speaker let alone the theologian his father is. As Francis of Assisi said: "Preach the Gospel to every creature. Speak if you must." Franklin's sister Anne is, in my humble estimation, the keeper of the evangelist's mantle: intelligent, persuasive, articulate.

God bless Billy Graham.

by: hammerud

11-04-2009 @ 9:45pm

We need to remember that Jesus offended his culture. He said, "The world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are evil." In speaking to crowds He said, "if you then being evil..." and on an other occasion, "...unless you repent...you will perish." I agree with Billy Graham that what happens to unsaved people is God's call because God is the only One Who sees the secrets of the heart; but, having said that, anyone who ends up there will end up there only thru Christ -- as it says in Acts, "...there is no other name under heaven whereby we might be saved." Jesus' was committed to communicating Truth and Truth offends a God-rejecting world. In one case the crowd took him to a hill to cast him down because of what He said. Billy Graham is a wonderful man of God, but not all such people end up being popular with the culture. Jesus ended up on a cross. God bless Billy Graham and God bless Franklin Graham.

by: hammerud

11-04-2009 @ 9:45pm

We need to remember that Jesus offended his culture. He said, "The world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are evil." In speaking to crowds He said, "if you then being evil..." and on an other occasion, "...unless you repent...you will perish." I agree with Billy Graham that what happens to unsaved people is God's call because God is the only One Who sees the secrets of the heart; but, having said that, anyone who ends up there will end up there only thru Christ -- as it says in Acts, "...there is no other name under heaven whereby we might be saved." Jesus' was committed to communicating Truth and Truth offends a God-rejecting world. In one case the crowd took him to a hill to cast him down because of what He said. Billy Graham is a wonderful man of God, but not all such people end up being popular with the culture. Jesus ended up on a cross. God bless Billy Graham and God bless Franklin Graham.

by: scottvolltrauer

11-05-2009 @ 7:21am

One of the most humbling and teachable moments of my life was when Billy Graham stood up from his chair to greet me; greet me. He has never met me and I was the one interrupting his conversation.

http://mysilentscream.com

by: scottvolltrauer

11-05-2009 @ 7:21am

One of the most humbling and teachable moments of my life was when Billy Graham stood up from his chair to greet me; greet me. He has never met me and I was the one interrupting his conversation.

http://mysilentscream.com

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: abasch

11-03-2009 @ 5:36pm

I like Billy Grahams theological humility. It is important that we know are role, which is not to judge a persons eternal soul, but to lead them to God. Only God is authorized to judge the soul.

With that said, the Scriptures make it clear that only through faith in Jesus Christ can a person be saved and enter heaven.

I also wonder about questions such as what about people who never hear the gospel, Jews that died in the holocaust, kids that die before an "age of accountability". These are answers that we do not have, but we can trust that God in His goodness, is way more good than we would be in this situations. So I personally have peace there.

As far as evolution, I think we need to start educating ourselves more and more, learn more about the different types of evolution.
Evolution is a scientific fact, but it has not been adequately proven that the human species originated from evolution rather than being created. Again, if these answers and topics were easy, they would be, well, easy! We should still be careful not to accept as fact something that happened in prehistory that we know little about. I know one could say the same thing about creation, but I personally find creation more believable.

There will be people in heaven who believed in evolution (the origin of our species type of evolution), so it isnt the most important topic, but I am sticking to creation as it is written in Genesis, humbly.

by: abasch

11-03-2009 @ 5:36pm

I like Billy Grahams theological humility. It is important that we know are role, which is not to judge a persons eternal soul, but to lead them to God. Only God is authorized to judge the soul.

With that said, the Scriptures make it clear that only through faith in Jesus Christ can a person be saved and enter heaven.

I also wonder about questions such as what about people who never hear the gospel, Jews that died in the holocaust, kids that die before an "age of accountability". These are answers that we do not have, but we can trust that God in His goodness, is way more good than we would be in this situations. So I personally have peace there.

As far as evolution, I think we need to start educating ourselves more and more, learn more about the different types of evolution.
Evolution is a scientific fact, but it has not been adequately proven that the human species originated from evolution rather than being created. Again, if these answers and topics were easy, they would be, well, easy! We should still be careful not to accept as fact something that happened in prehistory that we know little about. I know one could say the same thing about creation, but I personally find creation more believable.

There will be people in heaven who believed in evolution (the origin of our species type of evolution), so it isnt the most important topic, but I am sticking to creation as it is written in Genesis, humbly.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-03-2009 @ 6:27pm

Al Tizon from Evangelicals for Social Action has a new book out ( http://wipfandstock.com/store/Transformation_af... ) basically arguing that an Evangelicalism of transformation has "won the day" over a strictly personal conversion theology (I don't know if he would buy my summary of his argument). And that this turn of focus hinged on the '74 Lausanne event -- the direct fruit of Dr. Graham.

In a sense his humility and selflessness disguise much of the impact he has had; and remind me our lives and relationship ought bear the markings of Jesus.

Many preached conversion. Many preached crossing the divisions of the world to love our neighbors. He did those things--without raising himself up to say, "I will now tear down the walls of East and West, etc."

He really is a great example how we can both be trapped in our culture and also be formed by Christ within it and be used in quite revolutionary ways--even beyond our intent and imagingation--if we allow the transforming power of God to have access.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-03-2009 @ 6:27pm

Al Tizon from Evangelicals for Social Action has a new book out ( http://wipfandstock.com/store/Transformation_af... ) basically arguing that an Evangelicalism of transformation has "won the day" over a strictly personal conversion theology (I don't know if he would buy my summary of his argument). And that this turn of focus hinged on the '74 Lausanne event -- the direct fruit of Dr. Graham.

In a sense his humility and selflessness disguise much of the impact he has had; and remind me our lives and relationship ought bear the markings of Jesus.

Many preached conversion. Many preached crossing the divisions of the world to love our neighbors. He did those things--without raising himself up to say, "I will now tear down the walls of East and West, etc."

He really is a great example how we can both be trapped in our culture and also be formed by Christ within it and be used in quite revolutionary ways--even beyond our intent and imagingation--if we allow the transforming power of God to have access.

by: ford49

11-03-2009 @ 7:08pm

Amen, Amen, and Amen!!!! It's Micah 6:8 and Chronicals 7:14 come alive....

by: ford49

11-03-2009 @ 7:08pm

Amen, Amen, and Amen!!!! It's Micah 6:8 and Chronicals 7:14 come alive....

by: uberVU - social comments

11-03-2009 @ 7:55pm

Social comments and analytics for this post...

This post was mentioned on Twitter by craigadams49: RT @Sojourners: Billy Graham has maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. http://bit.ly/24rY6M...

by: kansasmennonite

11-04-2009 @ 11:04am

What about Franklin Graham? Isn't he a lot more political, fundamental, and divisive? Kind of reminds me of the Schaeffers.

by: kansasmennonite

11-04-2009 @ 11:04am

What about Franklin Graham? Isn't he a lot more political, fundamental, and divisive? Kind of reminds me of the Schaeffers.

by: ckgmail

11-04-2009 @ 6:34pm

Abasch, which Genesis creation account are you sticking to?

by: ckgmail

11-04-2009 @ 6:34pm

Abasch, which Genesis creation account are you sticking to?

by: abasch

11-04-2009 @ 7:30pm

The first chapter

by: abasch

11-04-2009 @ 7:30pm

The first chapter

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-04-2009 @ 9:27pm

I had the pleasure of working with the BGEA on two separate occasions. I cherish them both. At the meetings there was always a woman and a person of color who spoke and/or prayed from the platform. Yes, some of the larger independent churches stayed away. Nevertheless, CHRISTians of every stripe were involved including two Catholic dioceses with reps on the executive board. Record crowds were recorded at the venues and many, many souls rescued from a Christless eternity.

After the attack against us on 9/11, the national day of prayer in Washington was an amazing display of men and women of good will coming to together and speaking in their unique religious voices rather than some vapid universalism; truly America the beautiful. Mr. Graham was unapologetically but gently magnificent in what he said and how he said it.

The opening of the BG Library included speeches from Republican and Democratic US presidents. George Bush #41 was very emotional while speaking of Mr. Graham and Bill Clinton spoke powerfully of how the BGEA stood up to and faced down the Ku Klux Klan in Arkansas.

As far as the kids are concerned, on the night when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, I called Samaritan's Purse to make a donation, to do something. It was very late at night but a young woman answered the phone and took my money. I asked when she thought they would be getting into New Orleans. Her reply? Something akin to "Sir, as we speak there are tracker trailer trucks outside the city waiting for the storm to pass."

No, Franklin is not the speaker let alone the theologian his father is. As Francis of Assisi said: "Preach the Gospel to every creature. Speak if you must." Franklin's sister Anne is, in my humble estimation, the keeper of the evangelist's mantle: intelligent, persuasive, articulate.

God bless Billy Graham.

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-04-2009 @ 9:27pm

I had the pleasure of working with the BGEA on two separate occasions. I cherish them both. At the meetings there was always a woman and a person of color who spoke and/or prayed from the platform. Yes, some of the larger independent churches stayed away. Nevertheless, CHRISTians of every stripe were involved including two Catholic dioceses with reps on the executive board. Record crowds were recorded at the venues and many, many souls rescued from a Christless eternity.

After the attack against us on 9/11, the national day of prayer in Washington was an amazing display of men and women of good will coming to together and speaking in their unique religious voices rather than some vapid universalism; truly America the beautiful. Mr. Graham was unapologetically but gently magnificent in what he said and how he said it.

The opening of the BG Library included speeches from Republican and Democratic US presidents. George Bush #41 was very emotional while speaking of Mr. Graham and Bill Clinton spoke powerfully of how the BGEA stood up to and faced down the Ku Klux Klan in Arkansas.

As far as the kids are concerned, on the night when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, I called Samaritan's Purse to make a donation, to do something. It was very late at night but a young woman answered the phone and took my money. I asked when she thought they would be getting into New Orleans. Her reply? Something akin to "Sir, as we speak there are tracker trailer trucks outside the city waiting for the storm to pass."

No, Franklin is not the speaker let alone the theologian his father is. As Francis of Assisi said: "Preach the Gospel to every creature. Speak if you must." Franklin's sister Anne is, in my humble estimation, the keeper of the evangelist's mantle: intelligent, persuasive, articulate.

God bless Billy Graham.

by: hammerud

11-04-2009 @ 9:45pm

We need to remember that Jesus offended his culture. He said, "The world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are evil." In speaking to crowds He said, "if you then being evil..." and on an other occasion, "...unless you repent...you will perish." I agree with Billy Graham that what happens to unsaved people is God's call because God is the only One Who sees the secrets of the heart; but, having said that, anyone who ends up there will end up there only thru Christ -- as it says in Acts, "...there is no other name under heaven whereby we might be saved." Jesus' was committed to communicating Truth and Truth offends a God-rejecting world. In one case the crowd took him to a hill to cast him down because of what He said. Billy Graham is a wonderful man of God, but not all such people end up being popular with the culture. Jesus ended up on a cross. God bless Billy Graham and God bless Franklin Graham.

by: hammerud

11-04-2009 @ 9:45pm

We need to remember that Jesus offended his culture. He said, "The world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are evil." In speaking to crowds He said, "if you then being evil..." and on an other occasion, "...unless you repent...you will perish." I agree with Billy Graham that what happens to unsaved people is God's call because God is the only One Who sees the secrets of the heart; but, having said that, anyone who ends up there will end up there only thru Christ -- as it says in Acts, "...there is no other name under heaven whereby we might be saved." Jesus' was committed to communicating Truth and Truth offends a God-rejecting world. In one case the crowd took him to a hill to cast him down because of what He said. Billy Graham is a wonderful man of God, but not all such people end up being popular with the culture. Jesus ended up on a cross. God bless Billy Graham and God bless Franklin Graham.

by: scottvolltrauer

11-05-2009 @ 7:21am

One of the most humbling and teachable moments of my life was when Billy Graham stood up from his chair to greet me; greet me. He has never met me and I was the one interrupting his conversation.

http://mysilentscream.com

by: scottvolltrauer

11-05-2009 @ 7:21am

One of the most humbling and teachable moments of my life was when Billy Graham stood up from his chair to greet me; greet me. He has never met me and I was the one interrupting his conversation.

http://mysilentscream.com

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-05-2009 @ 4:22pm

No question, hammerud. Amen.

by: ChristGraceFaith

11-05-2009 @ 4:22pm

No question, hammerud. Amen.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 12:23pm

Aaron, have you ever watched or attended a Billy Graham crusade? Right up to the end, he was preaching that dying without consciously accepting Jesus as one's savior would result in eternal separation from God. This "theological humility" is an act, or a facet of his personality he turns on during an interview. I don't believe for a moment that he believes there will be persons of other faiths, or of no faith, in heaven.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 12:23pm

Aaron, have you ever watched or attended a Billy Graham crusade? Right up to the end, he was preaching that dying without consciously accepting Jesus as one's savior would result in eternal separation from God. This "theological humility" is an act, or a facet of his personality he turns on during an interview. I don't believe for a moment that he believes there will be persons of other faiths, or of no faith, in heaven.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:08pm

If you re-read the statement you will note there is no contradiction.

He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling.

Maybe he is truly humble--able to take hold of what he believes he is accountable for--and able to let go of that which he understands to rest in God's hands.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:08pm

If you re-read the statement you will note there is no contradiction.

He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling.

Maybe he is truly humble--able to take hold of what he believes he is accountable for--and able to let go of that which he understands to rest in God's hands.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:16pm

"He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling."

Right - and my point is that is not what he used to say from the pulpit, even during the later years when he had become more "liberal".

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:16pm

"He asserts God's love is for all and eternal salvation available to all; that judgment of such salvation belongs to God and is not dependent on our labeling."

Right - and my point is that is not what he used to say from the pulpit, even during the later years when he had become more "liberal".

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:26pm

I guess my point was not complete. It is not a contradiction to assert that and still hold that a reconciled, saving, relationship with God comes solely through the provision of Jesus for which we make a willful decision.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 10:26pm

I guess my point was not complete. It is not a contradiction to assert that and still hold that a reconciled, saving, relationship with God comes solely through the provision of Jesus for which we make a willful decision.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:28pm

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. That isn't what's being said here.

by: cipher

11-06-2009 @ 10:28pm

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. That isn't what's being said here.

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 11:45pm

Since I'm so mistaken--do you mind explaining just a wee bit more so I can see the error?

by: letjusticerolldown

11-06-2009 @ 11:45pm

Since I'm so mistaken--do you mind explaining just a wee bit more so I can see the error?

by: lizdyer

11-10-2009 @ 6:26pm

I'm a little late jumping in here but I just had to say "it was the religious people that were offended by Jesus"

by: lizdyer

11-10-2009 @ 6:26pm

I'm a little late jumping in here but I just had to say "it was the religious people that were offended by Jesus"

by: hammerud

11-10-2009 @ 7:57pm

It was, but it was also "the world," which includes all of us. Jesus
said, "the world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are
evil." And He also said, "if it hated me, it will hate you." If, as
Christians, our interaction with the world is all nice and sweet, the
message probably isn't being shared.

by: hammerud

11-10-2009 @ 7:57pm

It was, but it was also "the world," which includes all of us. Jesus
said, "the world hates me because I testify of it that its deeds are
evil." And He also said, "if it hated me, it will hate you." If, as
Christians, our interaction with the world is all nice and sweet, the
message probably isn't being shared.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 5:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 5:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 7:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.

by: Palosaari

12-19-2009 @ 7:47pm

Good article. But the part that doesn't make sense is: "Billy Graham has consistently maintained throughout his ministry that Christianity and evolution are compatible. While it may be fashionable for evangelical leaders today to speak of intelligent design over and against young earth creationism, Billy Graham goes even further by insisting that the Bible is not a science book,"

This seems to imply, in the use of the conjunctions, that Intelligent Design is a stepping stone towards Graham's statements, or that the ID hypothesis fits with Theistic Evolution. It isn't, and it doesn't. While IDists secretly support evolution in most cases and hope their followers don't discover this, the basic premise of ID as a hypothesis and philosophy is antithetical to evolution, science, and good theology. Graham is right, that the Bible is not a science book, and imo, he is right to see evolution and scripture as compatible. But Graham is not going further along that road than the IDists- the IDists are preaching the incompatibility of science and scripture. I applaud Graham's stance, and deplore the actions of those unnamed evangelicals leaders who support ID.