FALWELL INVITES GRAHAM TO SPEAK AT LIBERTY

January 28, 1997 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) - A watershed of sorts has occurred at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University. The scheduled 1997 commencement speaker is Dr. Billy Graham, the foremost spokesman for the New Evangelical movement. This was announced in November, and the headline article in the December 1996 issue of the National Liberty Journal proclaimed the news. We quote from this article--

"Liberty University confirmed in November that the Rev. Dr. Billy Graham will bring the commencement address for the 1997 graduation exercises on May 3. Dr. Graham is one of the foremost evangelical leaders of the 20th Century. ... It is befitting that Dr. Graham will speak at Liberty's 1997 Commencement, since his grandson, William Franklin (Will) Graham IV, will be among the graduating seniors. (Another grandson, Roy Graham, is a freshman at Liberty.) ... Dr. Falwell said, 'This will be Dr. Graham's first visit to Liberty. THIS COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS WILL NO DOUBT BE REMEMBERED HISTORICALLY IN THE NEXT CENTURY AS ONE OF LIBERTY'S HIGH DAYS. I am grateful that Dr. Graham is taking time from his busy schedule to grace us with his presence" (emphasis added) (National Liberty Journal, December 1996, pp. 1,17).

The National Liberty Journal did not give one word of warning that Dr. Graham has been at the forefront of breaking down the walls between truth and error, between sound churches and apostate churches in this generation. There was not one word of warning about the fact that Dr. Graham has sent thousands of converts back into Roman Catholic, modernistic, and other churches which preach heretical gospels. These facts have been documented many times by men who have been concerned enough about the truth to take a public stand against a man who is upheld by popular Christianity today almost as a god. To say anything negative about Dr. Graham and his ministry is to bring the wrath of millions of professing Christians upon one's head. Pastors have told me that if they would simply avoid mentioning Dr. Graham and his compromise, their churches easily would be two times as large. We have documented Dr. Graham's compromise in an article which can be viewed at the Way of Life Literature web site under the Fundamental Baptist News Service Topical Listing. It is titled "Graham's Disobedience to the Word of God" and is dated October 6, 1995. http://www.wayoflife.org/

Do we hate Dr. Graham? We have been foolishly charged with this by those who are opposed to biblical separation. By no means do we hate Dr. Graham. I grew up in a Southern Baptist home and always loved to hear Billy Graham preach on the radio and television during my youth. I still get a thrill when I hear his voice. I have often prayed for the man, and I have often asked the Lord why a man who claims to love the gospel would so compromise the gospel that he would refuse to identify and avoid false teachers. Dr. Graham's preaching was partially instrumental in the salvation of my wife and her mother. They heard Graham on television in Alaska in the early 1960s, were stirred to seek the Lord, found a little Baptist church, and were led to Christ by that pastor. I stand before the Lord tonight as I write this. He knows that we do not hate Billy Graham. We are brokenhearted over his compromise. We have shed many tears over the confusion which has been wrought by his unscriptural methodology, but we refuse to keep our mouth shut when the very gospel of Jesus Christ is at stake. It is better to obey God than man, my dear friends. This is serious business. Paul did not hesitate to rebuke Peter publicly for his compromise and hypocrisy because, by the same, Peter was confusing the gospel in the minds of the observers (Galatians 2:11-14).

WE DO AGREE, THOUGH, WITH THE NATIONAL LIBERTY JOURNAL THAT IT IS BEFITTING THAT DR. GRAHAM WILL FINALLY SPEAK AT LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. Dr. Falwell and his church and school claim to be fundamental Baptists, but, alas, for many years they have been sliding into the New Evangelical camp. Today they are firmly entrenched in that unscriptural position.

THE HISTORY AND DEFINITION OF NEW EVANGELICALISM

New-evangelicalism is not a term which was created by Fundamentalists. It was devised by key Evangelical leaders in the 1940s to describe a new philosophy which was gaining ascendancy among those who claimed to be Evangelical Bible believers.

The term "New Evangelicalism" was coined by (or so he claimed) the late Harold John Ockenga (1905-1985) to define a new type of Evangelicalism and to distinguish it from those who had heretofore born that label. Ockenga had a phenomenal influence upon today's Evangelicalism. He was the founder of the National Association of Evangelicals, co-founder and one-time president of Fuller Theological Seminary, first president of the World Evangelical Fellowship, president of Gordon College and Gordon-Conwell Seminary, a director of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and chairman of the board and one-time editor of Christianity Today.

In the foreword to Dr. Harold Lindsell's book The Battle for the Bible (Zondervan, 1976), Ockenga stated the position of New Evangelicalism:

"Neo-evangelicalism was born in 1948 in connection with a convocation address which I gave in the Civic Auditorium in Pasadena. While reaffirming the theological view of Fundamentalism, this address repudiated its ecclesiology and its social theory. The ringing call for a REPUDIATION OF SEPARATISM and the summons to social involvement received a hearty response from many Evangelicals. ... It differed from Fundamentalism in ITS REPUDIATION OF SEPARATISM and its determination to engage itself in the theological dialogue of the day. It had a new emphasis upon the application of the gospel to the sociological, political, and economic areas of life" (emphasis added).

Ockenga and the new generation of Evangelicals, Billy Graham figuring most prominently, determined to abandon a militant Bible stance.

Earlier in his ministry Ockenga had preached and practiced separation. He left Princeton and his Presbyterian denomination because of theological modernism. Somewhere along the line, though, he rejected biblical separation. Ockenga contended that Evangelicals should practice infiltration rather than separation, meaning they should stay in the apostate denominations and organizations and try to change them from within rather than separate from them and serve God in pure churches and organizations. He contended that Evangelicals should practice dialogue rather than exhortation, that they should not be negative in their message by rebuking and warning false teachers publicly, but should attempt to change the false teachers through dialogue. He taught that Evangelicals should reexamine their idea of worldliness and not be as strict about separating from worldly evils as Bible-believing Christians had been in earlier days.

God says, "Walk ye in the old paths," but the New Evangelical reassesses the old paths. God says, "Remove not the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set," but the New Evangelical has removed them one by one. God says, "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness," but the New Evangelical reasons that such fellowship is necessary. God says, "A little leaven leaventh the whole lump," but the New Evangelical thinks he can reform the already leavened lump. God says, "evil communications corrupt good manners," but the New Evangelical thinks good manners can uplift evil communications. God says, "I resist the proud but give grace to the humble," but the New Evangelical thinks the way to reach the world is by meeting them on their own proud territory, matching them scholarly degree with degree.

The result of this new thinking has been dramatic. Within a mere fifty years, Evangelicalism has lost all semblance of its past purity, power, and glory. New Evangelicalism is blind and naked, but, for the most part, is not aware of it. In fact, New Evangelicalism glories in its new-found acceptance by the world and apostate Christendom, its vast material wealth, its satellites and transmitters, its worldwide television and radio networks, its vast publishing enterprises, its massive conferences.

NEW EVANGELICALISM IS NOT A DENOMINATION OR A GROUP. It is a spirit of disobedience. It is a mood of compromise. It is a rejection of many of the negative aspects of New Testament Christianity. It is an attitude of positivism. Old-line Presbyterians can be New Evangelical. Old-line Methodists can be New Evangelical. Fundamental Bible churches can be New Evangelical. Southern Baptists can be New Evangelical. INDEPENDENT FUNDAMENTAL BAPTISTS CAN BE NEW EVANGELICAL. Many are, and the number appears to be growing rapidly. Beware, friends. Don't be deceived by the label. Examine the content, and avoid that which is contrary to the Word of God.

"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple" (Romans 16:17,18).

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

"The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going" (Proverbs 14:15).

____________________________________