WHY OUR CHURCH DOES NOT SUPPORT THE 
BILLY GRAHAM CRUSADE - THE PURITANS HAD A BETTER WAY

Billy Graham will preach next Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday - for four nights - at the Rose Bowl. Thousands of new-evangelicals from the Los Angeles area will go to hear Billy Graham next week. But we do not recommend that you attend the crusade.

You must understand that there was a break, a division, between Billy Graham and his followers and the fundamentalists, which started back in 1957 at the New York Crusade. Before 1957 Billy Graham said that he was a fundamentalist. In those early years Graham was supported by fundamentalists like Dr. Bob Jones, Sr. and Dr. John R. Rice. But in 1957 Billy Graham began to cooperate with rank liberals who reject the Bible. He put these extreme liberals up on the platform with him, and began to quote them favorably and work with them. This caused a division between the old-time fundamentalists and Billy Graham and his new-evangelical followers. That division continues to this day. Fundamentalist Baptist preachers in general do not cooperate with the Billy Graham crusades.

There are several reasons I think you should not attend the crusade meetings next week. But the main reason is because Billy Graham's preaching is confusing. As a young boy, I heard him many times. Back in the early fifties he preached stronger messages, filled with heavy warnings to the lost. He also presented a much clearer message to the lost than he does now. In 1996, for instance, I heard Billy Graham preach on national television. The sermon was titled "A New Beginning" and was video-taped in Cleveland, Ohio. This sermon was typical of the way Billy Graham preaches now. In the sermon Graham gave six different ways to be saved. He said:

1. "Believe on Jesus as your Lord and Saviour."

2. "Some of you have been saved at Confirmation."

3. "I believe I know the day I was born again, but my wife doesn't know the day. She has always loved Christ. She cannot remember the day when she didn't love Him, and she cannot remember the day when she didn't put Him first in her life."

4. "The only way you can get to Heaven is to come to the Cross and confess you are a sinner."

5. "You can be saved tonight by opening your heart to Christ."

6. "Coming forward and making it public makes it genuine in your life."

These six different ways to be saved contradict each other, and if one of them is true, then the other five cannot be true. This brings terrible confusion to unconverted people who hear his sermons.

1. "Believe on Jesus as your Lord and as your Saviour." This contradicts number six, where he told people that their salvation was not 'genuine' [his word] unless they came forward. Which is it - believing in Jesus, or coming forward? Or is it both? It is terribly confusing and wrong to tell people that salvation depends on the human action of walking out on the field and standing in front of the pulpit. That makes salvation hang on a person's moving his feet in a certain direction! It makes salvation a human effort, rather than the work of God in the heart. If you can "earn" your salvation by going "forward" where does God's grace come into the picture? Salvation does not depend on human works like this - but on the power of God working in a person's heart.

2. "Some of you might have been saved at Confirmation." Here Billy Graham says that Roman Catholics may be saved during a ceremony in which they promise to pray, "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners both now and in the hour of our death. Amen." They also acknowledged that salvation comes only through the "sacraments" of the Roman Catholic Church. Billy Graham tells them that some may be saved that way. But this contradicts number five, "You can be saved tonight by opening your heart to Christ." Which is it - salvation only through the Roman Catholic "sacraments" (as taught in Catholic Confirmation) or "salvation by opening your heart to Christ tonight"? Both cannot be true. Dr. Graham says it can be either one. I don't think the early Baptists and Protestants who were burned at the stake by the Catholics would agree with him on this. They were tortured and killed because they believed that the sacraments of the Catholic Church could never save anyone.

3. "I believe I know the day I was born again, but my wife doesn't know the day. She has always loved Christ. She cannot remember the day when she didn't love Him" This contradicts number four, where Billy Graham said, "The only way you can get to Heaven is to come to the Cross and confess that you are a sinner." How can that be the "only" way, if some people like his wife can be saved another way - by "always loving the Lord"? Why do the rest of us need to confess we're sinners and "come to the Cross" (which he says is "the only way"), although some special people like his  wife  don't  need  to  do  that?   (For  a  written reference to Mrs. Graham having no memory of salvation, see How To Be Born Again by Billy Graham [Word Books, 1977, p. 167]).

A logical examination of Billy Graham's six ways to be saved shows that they contradict each other (and the Bible) on many points. Why does Dr. Graham give six different ways to be saved in his sermons now? The answer is simple: like any good politician, he says many things, and lets you pick the one you like. That way no one, Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, or Pentecostal is offended. But does anyone really get saved after being bombarded by six different ways to do so in one sermon? I don't think so. I think whole Billy Graham crusades come and go with no one being truly converted, or with only a tiny handful. Billy Graham's sermons are just too confusing and self-contradictory to produce very many (if any) true conversions.

Dr. William J. McLoughlin, Jr., late professor at Brown University, gave a detailed analysis of several Graham crusades. He showed that Graham packed the stadiums by filling them with church members, through cleverly designed methods. Most all those who "came forward" were already members of evangelical churches, and already considered themselves "born again" Christians before they "went forward" for Graham to count them as "decisions for Christ." Dr. McLoughlin reported one survey, done in a London Billy Graham crusade, which showed that only 35 people, who were unchurched before the crusade, were still attending eight months later. Thousands came forward but a tiny number, only 35 people, were added to the churches! Think of it - only 35 people!¹

Dr. R. T. Ketcham, founder of the General Association of Regular Baptists, studied one of Billy Graham's San Francisco crusades, where 26,698 people "came forward" - and yet only 13 people were added to the churches. Think of it - only 13 people!²

And Billy Graham sends many of the people who come forward to rank liberal churches that don't believe the Bible. He sends thousands of others back to the Roman Catholic Church. How can we trust his message? Most of the "music" in the crusades is ugly rap and rock music - which does not glorify God. The worldly sound of the music appeals only to the carnal appetites of man. Billy Graham usually preaches from mutilated and poorly translated "versions" of the Bible. The whole Billy Graham crusade is just a pitiful rock concert and stage-show. It doesn't help the churches. It only gets a tiny number of unchurched people to go to church - often to extremely liberal churches at that. Few, if any, are saved.

You must understand that I don't hate Billy Graham.  In fact I can honestly say that I love him.  I have heard Billy Graham preach more than any man other than my former pastor - that is about 500 times.  I have read all of his books.  I have attended crusades personally in six different cities.  My observations are not based on ill will or rancor, but on the fact that this type of evangelism is very ineffective.  I must admit that I once preached very similarly to the way he does.  But I found that "decisionism" produces few converts.  I found that the Puritans and early evangelists, like Whitefield, Wesley, Edwards, and Nettleton, had a better way of doing evangelism.  That is what I advocate.  I have made all of this clear in two books, "Preaching to a Dying Nation," and its sequel, "Today's Apostasy."  Those two books can be ordered by phoning me at (818)352-0452.  I think we need to go back to the pre-Finney methods of evangelism.  

1. William G. McLoughlin, Jr., Modern Revivalism: Charles Grandison Finney to Billy Graham, Ronald Press, 1959, pp. 514-522.

2. R. T. Ketcham, Facts Concerning Billy Graham, Bible For Today, 1971, appendix III, p. 3; and The Oakland Tribune, December 17, 1958, p. 6-S.