How Charles Finney & Billy Graham Destroyed Christendom
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- Drawing a straight line from Charles Finney to Billy Graham. That line continues all the way to today’s mega-churches.
Watch the full episode here with Eric Conn: ruclips.net/user/li...
To support Right Response Ministries, visit: rightresponsem...
Subscribe to our Theology Applied podcast below:
Apple podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
Spotify podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
Google Play podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
*If you live in the Austin area, Pastor Joel just started planting a brand new church called Covenant Bible Church in Hutto, Texas. He would love for you to come visit on a Sunday. Check out the church’s website for details: covenantbible....
#fatherhood #america #father
This guy isn’t worthy to kiss Billy’s shoes. Graham brought more people to Christ than this guy has ever dreamt of.
To christ or ecumenism ??
It's not man that brings people to Christ but it is God's grace that brings people to Christ
Graham was a forerunner of the end times church . Grahams secret meetings with the pope are a mystery . Recent comments by present pope advocating multi faith confirm this .
Consider doing more research. I've learned to be careful about lifting up people, idols will fall. I did a deep dive into Billy Graham several years back and was shocked by what I learned. Same with C.S. Lewis.
@@katiebaldwin8108 With you . Billy not only was a forerunner of end times world religion but was in a sense another Judas that betrayed Jesus .
Does anyone know who these peoiple are ? Finney preached in Rochester and you either got saved or left town and the town was dry for 40 years . We took part in a Graham crusade here and church growth exploaded with newborn Cristians even some pastors like the ones speaking here came to the Lord . We know Finney and Graham by their fruits and millions and millions came to faith in Christ through their ministry .
Yes! I’ve heard them but would not take them as authority. You can have revival believing what Billy Graham believed.
Billy Grahams only Calvinist friend here👋 I've watched hours and hours of his sermons and I have to say that guy was as faithful as it gets to preaching a complete cross, repentance, sin ridden gospel as it gets. His last message recorded as a 90 something year old about the cross gives you chills. I got your back Billy!!✌️
Wasn't/isn't Ruth Graham (Billy's widow) Calvinistic/Reformed? I trust that you are not the only one in his corner.
Billy Graham was pro choice. And he said the he believes People will go to heaven who never knew the name of Jesus Christ. He says if people are looking for something but they don't know what. Everyone is looking for something. And we know that the Holy Spirit draws people. And if the Holy Spirit draws them they will know the name of Jesus Christ. I loved Billy Graham until I started seeing his interviews. I forget the guys name who interviewed people. But also Billy Graham was interviewed by Robert Schuler of the Power Hour i think out of California. And he said Muslims and Hindus and other people will go to Heaven because they are looking for something better. That describes everybody
@@davidprice9792 we all have some doctrinal differences brother but to say as the thumbnail did that Billy Graham destroyed Christendom is a high charge. I'm not saying you agree with that but James strictly warns us of criticizing our brothers in the Lord. I understand doctrinal differences being discussed and that's great but ive noticed a lot of intolerance from our side here. Billy Graham is with the Lord absolutely and I almost get this vibe from some that he's not. I've heard reformed guys actually say that he's burning in hell which is crazy man.
@@davidprice9792 and I have seen that interview brother. I want to be more charitable than what I used to be with people and if I'm going to make a judgement I do so based on their whole body of work. We're fortunate enough to see that body of work from Billy and he absolutely believed that people needed to repent and believe the gospel in order to be saved. He preached the cross literally everytime he preached. He may have had some ideas I wouldn't have agreed with on a scholarly level but in terms of gospel work we should be quicker to honor him I think.
@@duranbailiff5337 I actually don't know that for certain brother.
One of my favorite moments in the Lord of the Rings is when Theoden finally finds his courage. Where the losses of the battle have piled up to the point where they have nothing left but to ride out and face their enemy. Brilliantly written in the books and brilliantly captured in the movie.
Theoden: So much death. What can men do against such reckless hate?
Aragorn: Ride out with me. Ride out and meet them.
Theoden: For death and glory!
Aragorn: For Rohan. For your people.
Gimli: The sun is rising.
Gandalf (VO): Look for my coming at first light on the fifth day. At dawn look to the east.
Theoden: Yes. Yes! The horn of Helm Hammerhand shall sound in the Deep, one last time.
Theoden (to Aragorn): Let this be the hour we draw swords together.
Yes, we as Christians retreat when we should. But against the reckless hate of the Social Justice pantheon we can give no quarter. Not for our own glory, but for His. Not to just save our own, but to protect His own. The time is coming if it isn't already here where we need to sound the horn and figuratively draw our swords. Not out of malice towards the people we struggle against, but against the evil they enable.
Awesome analogy ! My sentiments exactly.
Oh, Jonathan, so well said!!
Would Satan raise up two men who preached the Gospel of Christ and bring many people to salvation in Christ Jesus through them?
Would Satan encourage Charles Finney to deny the things of this world and his own pleasures so that he could give all of his time and energy to evangelism?
Would Satan use Billy Graham to preach the Gospel to and influence many world leaders during his day?
How can you sit there and call those whom the Lord used as stupid? Is your heart so cold as to not see an issue with that?
Pastor Joel, your comments are ignorant and motivated by spiritual blindness in the anointing God placed on these two men and the work He did through them.
What a complete slap in the face to a man who dedicated his life to serving Christ. I am so glad the Lord was faithful to lead me out of reformed circles. This is so disheartening.
@John Sixfourteefour There are many people who never hear the Gospel but have an internal understanding that God exists. I could see a situation where someone who understands there is one God, that have a fear and repentant heart towards Him knowing that their good works cannot save them and throw themselves at His mercy based on the amount of revelation they have. The same way Abraham's belief was credited to him righteousness as well as many in the OT who did not know the specifics of the Messiah (Jesus) but they trusted and believed in God.
I cannot say I believe this 100% but it is something to consider in my opinion. God can reveal Himself to people in dreams and whatever means He wants to.
Careful, your idol is being exposed
@John Sixfourteefour I don't align with the Westminister because it plainly states a deterministic view of God in that He, "Ordains whatsoever comes to pass." Logically that makes God the author of evil even though they go through hoops to get around it.
Instead of trying to fit God into my theological box I trust the whole counsel of His Word. The Bible clearly reveals His desire for all men to be saved (1 John 2:2, 2 Peter 3:9, 1 Timothy 2:4).
That scenario I mentioned is not something I 100% affirm but there is a case to be made for it from Scripture. I do not hold to a cessationist view of God so I believe He speaks to us in many ways, not just reading Scripture. We seem to have completely different theological foundations we are working from. I'm glad you could write a book to refute that idea. My main concern is unity in the body of Christ, not tearing down the ministry of a Godly man the Lord used to bring many people to Christ.
@John Sixfourteefour Soft determinism is just hard determinism with longer strings.
These duo are ignorant indeed.
Saying this with as much love as possible, brother: Please don't forget you are sitting in a soft chair, in air conditioning, able to give your opinions on others due to the technology and the immense wealth of America. You have had access to a wealth of knowledge and have obvious time to study and read for years. That isn't 99% of the world. They might hear the gospel once if they are lucky. You can determine Billy Graham "destroyed" Christianity, but can't that come from a place of arrogance? "I think this way, I have learned this way, the Bible agrees with *me* and I have had 100s of hours to devote to its study", so therefore everyone else who doesn't think like me is in error. Billy wasn't perfect, and I am not here to defend anyone, but to try to remind us that God uses flawed men, like yourself, to reach out to others with the gospel. No one has it 100% right, we all will make errors, but somehow we attack each other and cause divisions based on our opinions of how to read the Bible. We obviously call out wickedness and sin in the church, we have to, and should always. But try to remember 1 Cor 4:5: Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God. I see what you are saying, but despite the errors you might see in his ministry, God can save people despite those flaws. Also, you must believe that God ordained and willed Billy to be in the position he was in... was it God's will to use Billy to destroy His church? This feels like a rebuke of an elder, not a appeal as a father.
Hey, what about God saves whom he chooses. Why worry about the lost that are never going to be saved?, it's God's prerogative. Just go out and properly present the Gospel and not worry about if they are going to get saved.
Billy was easy believe all will be saved.
Graham was pro abortion, even in his younger years
I agree. I discovered this man's channel about several months ago, and he gives me big legalist vibe. I understand how we all play a role in the body of Christ, but this man seems a bit full of himself due to obvious long time on studying the word. Humility is important.
Absolutely correct. Just because he believes something doesn't make it or him right. When you get into the weeds of the variances in many Christian doctrines you walk away after 1000's hours of listening and comparing and scriptural dot connecting that we humans have some very logical and well thought out differences in how we interpret different areas of biblical doctrine. To claim that we or I have "the" answer and that if you disagree with me then your wrong view is detrimental to your own spirituality growth and detrimental to the church etc. How arrogant. All the old original doctrinal views have morphed over the years. Also most have added areas and nuances that were never even thought of in years past. Now all the sudden this newly understood nuanced doctrinal view is "the" correct view. This is intellectual dishonesty. He is in Texas now and that dog won't hunt.
While I do admit that there was probably some value to Billy Graham and his ability to reach people far and wide with the influence of the Christian message, I will also say that propogating a watered down message may have done less good than initially thought. Getting a bunch of unregenerate people to "walk down an aisle", "raise your hand for Jesus", or "ask Jesus into your heart" causes a lot of false converts, who then influence the local church and drag down biblical standards to fit their worldly desires. But even with all of that said, this is also ordained by God, so even this is good for His church. I think 2020 helped to cull a lot of that, but there is still more work to be done.
I used to find Billy Graham’s sermons helpful on certain things in the Christian walk, but because I know that he was a full blown universalist, I don’t watch his content. A broken clock is right twice a day, but one that works is better to have. There’s better teachers out there. I view Billy Graham as a Philippians 1:18 scenario.
Graham was a universalist and “converts” were handed over to the Catholic Church
That is a good thing! We should be trying to catch as many fish as possible. Let Jesus sort out the false converts Himself. You just preach the gospel to all who will listen!!
@@xrendezv0usx This is not a good thing. We are saved through faith alone by grace alone. Saying a prayer or walking an aisle is the replacement of baptism and is used to mislead folks into thinking their work, their response, their walking down the aisle confirms their salvation more than the blood of Christ. This is a dangerous thing to do and has misled many into thinking they are saved. Think if that was your kid? Oh well, just tell them to say and prayer and let God do the sorting. Seriously? God has already done the sorting and he calls us to repent and believe in Christ, period. Your response is proof of how these two men have so tainted the perception of the Church and has produced a false Gospel that will never save a single soul. I pray that if your are saved that the Lord will give you a godly example to disciple you and help steer you towards truth. What these men have done is not a good thing
@@SolusChristus3 I don't quite understand what is so bad about a public proclamation of faith? You say we are saved by grace alone by faith alone, which I 100% agree with, but what could be a better proclamation of faith than standing up in the middle of a crowded church and walking to the front to publicly proclaim your faith in Christ and accept Him into your heart and surrender your life to Him? What is so bad about it?
And, more importantly, what do you think people should do instead? How should someone become saved by grace alone by faith alone?
Finney wasn’t liked by old school Presbyterianism who were generally against the revivals of the second great awakening (with some exceptions). Charles Hodge was one of his main critics during his lifetime. New school Presbyterianism of Finneys days were in support of the Second Great Awakening.
The overtone of the Second Great Awakening was Arminian in theology and Finney was one of the main protagonists during the second great awakening. It baffles me how short sighted many calvinists are when it comes to judging a man who lived his life for Christ and was instrumental in bringing many lost souls to the Savior and was used of God mightily to bring revivals to a backsliding church who had lost their first love.
Preaching Christ, repentance, faith and holiness were his constant themes. How can someone read his autobiography and deny the Spirit conviction upon thousands of hard hearted sinners who were made to tremble at Gods presence and flee to the Savior on the Cross for Salvation?
He didn’t preach cheap grace, easy believing , sinners prayer . His new measures or alter calls were for anxious sinners who under the conviction of the Holy Spirit needed spiritual guidance to come to the Savior for Salvation. God blessed his efforts and methods.
Their is a lot of head knowledge prevalent today whether among the Calvinists or Arminians and while we think that the gospel is only what fits in our systematic theology, God and his Truth is not bound by human theological systems.
I’m not here to advocate Finney, his godly life and fruitful work for the Lord will speak loud and clear one day in the last judgment. I would have shown the same support for men of God like Whitefield or Jonathan Edwards if their were accused for being heretics because they were zealous calvinists.
It’s not the gospel according to Luther, Calvin, Puritans, Wesley, Whitefield, Finney or Billy Graham that saves, it’s the gospel according to Jesus, the living Word of God that saves and it’s very clear in the scriptures the message of the Gospel and whether we overemphasize God’s sovereignty or man’s free will as long as our hearts are right with him, He will use us for his Glory.
100% agree
The allegiance to certain theologians and I'm very uncomfortable saying I am an "ist" or prescribe to an "ism", if it supercedes Christianity and Jesus Christ proper. I don't mind or think there's anything wrong with having these categories and groups as long as we put them on an inferior plane, a lesser category than The Gospel and not even comparable. All these things are ways certain men have thought about and acted because of christ, for better or worse.
Finney wasn't an Arminian. He was a Pelagian. His theology helped to wreck my faith for years.
"his godly life and fruitful work for the Lord"
Regarding Finney's "fruitful work", I would point you to Phil Johnson's article, "A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: How Charles Finney's Theology Ravaged the Evangelical Movement" for these quotes from both Finney and his contemporary Asa Mahan, both who lament the fruit of their many revivals, including many (if not most) false converts.
>> Predictably, most of Finney's spiritual heirs lapsed into apostasy, Socinianism, mere moralism, cultlike perfectionism, and other related errors. In short, Finney's chief legacy was confusion and doctrinal compromise. Evangelical Christianity virtually disappeared from western New York in Finney's own lifetime. Despite Finney's accounts of glorious "revivals," most of the vast region of New England where he held his revival campaigns fell into a permanent spiritual coldness during Finney's lifetime and more than a hundred years later still has not emerged from that malaise. This is directly owing to the influence of Finney and others who were simultaneously promoting similar ideas.
The Western half of New York became known as "the burnt-over district," because of the negative effects of the revivalist movement that culminated in Finney's work there. These facts are often obscured in the popular lore about Finney. But even Finney himself spoke of "a burnt district" [Memoirs, 78], and he lamented the absence of any lasting fruit from his evangelistic efforts. He wrote,
I was often instrumental in bringing Christians under great conviction, and into a state of temporary repentance and faith . . . . [But] falling short of urging them up to a point, where they would become so acquainted with Christ as to abide in Him, they would of course soon relapse into their former state [cited in B. B. Warfield, Studies in Perfectionism, 2 vols. (New York: Oxford, 1932), 2:24].
One of Finney's contemporaries registered a similar assessment, but more bluntly:
During ten years, hundreds, and perhaps thousands, were annually reported to be converted on all hands; but now it is admitted, that real converts are comparatively few. It is declared, even by [Finney] himself, that "the great body of them are a disgrace to religion" [cited in Warfield, 2:23].
B. B. Warfield cited the testimony of Asa Mahan, one of Finney's close associates,
. . . who tells us-to put it briefly-that everyone who was concerned in these revivals suffered a sad subsequent lapse: the people were left like a dead coal which could not be reignited; the pastors were shorn of all their spiritual power; and the evangelists-"among them all," he says, "and I was personally acquainted with nearly every one of them-I cannot recall a single man, brother Finney and father Nash excepted, who did not after a few years lose his unction, and become equally disqualified for the office of evangelist and that of pastor."
Thus the great "Western Revivals" ran out into disaster. . . . Over and over again, when he proposed to revisit one of the churches, delegations were sent him or other means used, to prevent what was thought of as an affliction. . . . Even after a generation had passed by, these burnt children had no liking for the fire [Warfield, 2:26-28].
Christianity is man made, Its antichrist, Yeshua never ever NEVER came to set up a religion called christianity. btw look at Finney's ees,, he was a kook. a true wierdo. Glad all ch=urches are closing, GOOD RIDDANCE
@@Chief_Of_Sinnersyour parroting critics and advisories. Not facts.
Saying Billy Graham destroyed Christendom is like saying Joel Webbon is saving it, completely asinine. OF COURSE Graham didn’t do everything right but there will be tens if not hundreds of thousands of people in heaven due to God’s use of Billy Graham.
This kind of armchair theology with clickbait titles needs to stop
It is attested in the Scriptures and church history, as well, that God uses flawed human beings.
Thank you!
Charles Finney wasn't an Arminian, he was a full blown Pelagian, he denied Justification by Faith alone, taught that you can lose salvation and take it back up whenever you want just life lifting weights, he denied the doctrine of original sin, he denied the penal substitution of Christ, taught that we can save ourselves and complete the Law on our own, taught that we can attain/earn Justification instead of as a free gift from God. Charles Finney literally deconstructed the whole Gospel. Some even said that he defeated Pelagius in Pelagianism
I wish I could find the Sproul sermon where he exclaims "Charles Finney was an UNVARNISHED PELAGIAN"!🤠
Arminius and Wesley doctrines stated one can lose salvation. Finney is consistent with these views. It's a recent new development that has created a non-historical position regarding regeneration.
From what I have been learning about Finney in recent times, gives me great pause to consider if he really holds membership in the body of Christ.
With historically sourced, new information that was not written by the preachers themselves Finney, Brahnam, Parnam, Wigglesworth, Bosworth & so many others of this ilk, are looking closer to being closer to 'religious experience' entertainers than Gospel revering, repentant souls, saved by grace & sacrifice of God almighty, by faith in Jesus Christ.
thank you for bringing important but sometimes divisive topic up. it was RC Sproul years ago who convinced me my theology of God was all messed up (no thanks to Finney and BG). due to experience I’m very cautious and calculated with pushing truth on my Christian friends who’ve been poisoned by bad doctrine so now i can just sent them a link and keep bugging them to watch 😂.
God’s love: there’s a misconception out there even in Christendom that a facet of God’s love that is conditional on faith & repentance doesn’t apply. Ephesians 2 ‘children of wrath’ doesn’t apply for some odd reason. for me i knew God was angry and nobody had to tell me. But God, who is rich in mercy regenerated me😢. why doesn’t He do that for everyone. it’s the same question as to why all the suffering? God didn’t create evil but allows it for His glory.
The Pelagian Captivity
of the Church:
mikeratliff.wordpress.com/2021/12/29/the-pelagian-captivity-of-the-church/
Sounds like Finney was guilty of … cosmic treason…
Finney and Graham were both used by God.. I don't agree with everything they taught but certainly they did not ruin christendom
Finney's systematic theology is fantastic. I've read a lot of Finney, and most people who speak evil of him are simply ignorant of his theological views.
Obviously you, "Right Response", you have never read Charles Finney in large. I have read hundreds of his sermons and his Systematic Theology. I have read dozens of Finney's books. One entire shelf in my library is devoted to books by Finney. His unabridged auto-briography changed my live and launched me into a service Christ in ministry with all my heart. Even Hodge said that there is not a broken link in the logic of Finney;s Theology. Read Finney from the horses mouth. I stopped Reading MacArthur because his attacks on Finney are based on the writings like Warfield and not an honest look at the Second Great Awakening.
I was reading Warfield on finney and it was pretty dense. I found some big inconsistencies, or at least misunderstandings, on the part of Warfield. It would be interesting to do an analysis of that. I think that's what generated a lot of false ideas about finney that grew worse over time.
Sigh. The Bible is the gospel. It's about God's rescue operation from heaven for man. One may not know the whole Bible when he or she gets saved, but they are believing the overarching message of the Bible. Of course doctrine is important as the believer matures in his or her faith, but just coming to Christ only requires the simple gospel and the power of the Holy Spirit.
Can you please do some videos that dive a bit deeper into how Finney and Graham negatively impacted Christendom? This video left me wanting to hear a bit more of a thorough analysis
Probably referring to the "say this prayer after me and walk this aisle to be saved" formulaic approach to salvation.
@@philipmurray9796 I did this walk and confession prayer 35 yers ago, 100% born again disciple of Christ, personally know hundreds of people who share the same testimony.
So you’d problem is ?
Calvinism is void of any gospel message, period.
@@markshaneh ok, I guess Spurgeon (a Calvinist) never preached a gospel message?
@philipmurray9796 And that's just one of the problems with evangelicals like Finney and Graham.(possibly the thing that's done the most damage, but there's undoubtedly a number of other issues with preachers like those guys, including universalism)
I understand the confusion about one or 2 of Billy grahams late interviews but have either of you guys ever watched ANY of Grahams early sermons. Not one but like 99% of them??? Their pretty solid…
It seems to me, that some don’t comprehend what evangelism is. I shared Gospel with Jewish and other nationalities, sometimes as long as it took to get from main floor to seventh in elevator and some came to faith in Yeshua the same evening.
Evangelism and discipleship are different momentums. Evangelism may take from few minutes to few hours, discipleship however is lifetime.
I have been street, synagogue debate and every imaginable evangelist in Israel, Russia, US, Canada, Germany etc. for 40 years and never had to talk to people about family headship, eldership in a congregation etc.
Just following Biblical principle of Hebrew acronym, we used to teach young believers to remember what it means to present Gospel and acronym is חכם. The meaning of the acronym, that also makes up the Hebrew word - wisdom. When sharing the Gospel, you followed the three letter principle, not to get sidetracked.
The first letters of each word stand for:
you are a Sinner
you need blood Atonement
the Messiah Jesus is the One who provide it the Blood Atonement through Death, Burial and Resurrection
that’s it.
Please brothers and sisters, don’t be to harsh on them who didn’t have a luxury of time to teach the whole counsel of God.
Thanks for the insights into Finney and Graham. Billy Graham was used to convert some key Christian leaders here in Australia, who have since gone on to start churches that are "gospel centred" in the bad sense - They don't believe or teach the confessions, they hate the law, and they don't do proper exegesis of scripture in their sermons anymore. They have been shown to be people-pleasing cowards since the "pandemic".
It is bothersome to me that many Calvinists are hyper-critics of other Christians and Calvin himself just like Swingly despised those that opposed child baptism and it was a crime to oppose him theologically in Geneva, even burning a man on the stake. I don't know much about Finney but What Billy Graham did in his mistakes is not close to what Calvin and Swingly did. I see the Calvinist be the hardest critics of all but rarely when you encounter evangelists is one a Calvinist. They bosts in Whitefield, Spurgeon and others but rarely do they follow in their steps. They only recruit other Christians.
Never forget the meeting of Jesus with the women at the well. He reached out to her where she was at. Yes, repent but I do not have to fix myself before I can hear Jesus speak to me in the middle of my messed up life and He tells me He loves me and wants me to change my life towards Him. Keep my eyes on Him, He will take me through my imperfect life towards His perfect plan. Praise God for Billy Grapham crusades.
When did he tell the woman at the well that he loved her? Careful not to make your emotions into the Gospel
Ok, I, m going back to the scriptures, get it written out better in my brain. I think what I was trying to express was that Jesus showed He God cared about her deeply included acknowledging the pain her life choices had made.
I know one thing, those whom God had CHOSEN since before the foundation of the world, that walked to the alter call, were saved. Most likely very few, but none the less, that tactical maneuver, in spite of it's flaws, God used. Am I wrong ?
@HaroldZwingley then why preach? It seems to me you're making a huge assumption, that the Holy Spirit doesn't empower or even use preaching. That seems contradictory to the Bible, though, doesn't it?
Can you do a show where you preach the gospel so I know what that is in contrast with what it isn’t? How did the apostles preach the gospel? Is there an example in the scriptures?
Yes.
Acts of the apostles.
Both the twelve (11) and Paul.
And Stephen 's sermon at his death.
It is a truly inspiring book 🙂
The Apostles had a simple message…Jesus buried, Jesus resurrected. Paul filled in the theology which explained salvation and how the Spirit applies it to our lives. Peter’s Acts 2 message is a good salvation starting point while Romans is Paul’s theological wisdom. Feast on these for awhile.
Sometimes we overcomplicate things. The gospel is not that difficult to understand. Most new believers understand it, and want to share it with as many people as they can. Unfortunately, the enemy comes and deceives them into thinking that they shouldn't be sharing the gospel with people until they have spent a few years reading the bible or have gone to a seminary and learned about apologetics. That is why so many pulpits lack power and authority. The pastors are relying too much on their own intellects and skills, rather than allowing the holy spirit to convict people. If most of us are honest with ourselves, we came to faith in Christ, not because of a deep theological sermon, but because of our parents told us about Jesus, or because we went to church and heard the music and were touched by it, or because we were in a difficult time in our lives and called out to God for help. In other words, it was simply knowing that Jesus was there, and feeling something in our hearts. Yet we spend thousands of dollars trying to get a seminary education so that we can evangelize.
These folks are doing Monday morning quarterbacking.
I'd be surprised if they ever led a soul to Christ in their entire lives.
Arminianism creates tares. Unregenerate professing believers.
Same with Calvinism. Living with the built in assumption that you’ve part of the special elect will breed arrogant pompous Christian’s. Often you’ll find a lot of Calvinists believe in works based salvation. They want to justify themselves being apart of the elect by showing their great works. Their filthy rags according to the Bible. Sadly, Calvinists don’t rely on biblical authority, they rely on the “institutes”.
It’s funny you bring up WLC, because he challenged James White on Calvinism weakest point which is Divine Determinism. God has to be the author of sin when man has no libertarian free will under reformed thought. This is blasphemy because God can’t be holy and righteous and also conjure up sin. There will always be enmity between God and Sin.
Hardcore calvinists who buy into divine determinism and works based salvation ARE DAMNABLE HERETICKS WHO WILL SPLIT HELL WIDE OPEN. I can’t even comprehend how a Calvinist can sleep at night when his man made philosophy leads to a place where the God of the universe is the author of sin. Don’t worry. Payday is coming for these Paul Washer and John MacArthur types. Payday Someday.
@@danielneutral8697 Daniel if you don't like the doctrine of election you better pick another religion and walk away from the Bible because the word election and elect are in the Bible 47 times. The scriptures plainly teach that God chooses in Salvation And if that offends you, then you are offended with God not with John Calvin
@@danielneutral8697 God created all things. He created good..He created evil he created the righteous...He created the wicked. THE SCRIPTURES DECLARE THIS!!!
@@Rbl7132 Of course I believe in the doctrine of election. Who said I didn’t? I don’t believe it’s unconditional like reformed folks, but it’s all over the scriptures.
The perfect personification of Sin is man believing they are like the most high like Lucifer wanted to be. How can God be the author of sin, when he was the one sinned against by humanity? Of course, God used sinful acts conjured up by the hearts of sinners to perform his will. That doesn’t mean he authored sin.
Jeremiah 19:5 proves my theology where God says that sacrificing children to Baal was a. Not commanded by God. b. Not spoken of by God. C. NEITHER CAME IT INTO MY MIND. This demonstrates that the depravity of man did not come from the words, mind, or decree of God. Why? Because he is perfect, holy, and just. Bob Jones Sr used to say “God would let the stars fall before he communed with Sin” This blows to bits divine determinism and is the line of argumentation I use against calvinists. Luckily, I have the Bible as my final authority and you have the institutes by John Calvin as yours.
For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 1 Cor. 2:2
It seems Billy Graham did the same thing, and souls were saved.
Mr. Graham was an Evangelist. Salvation is an evangelist’s stock and trade given time limits on television. The time for more doctrinal insight is when you get the repentant into a church setting. This takes time but time is all we have. As for Mr. Finley I have not studied his theological viewpoints. But as Jesus said, if they be for us they cannot be against us. To the matter of mega churches where there are many people there are many opportunities for error, and for compromise when fame and popularity arise, but also the chances are there for great works too. Perhaps a more balanced view would serve us better?
Billy Graham seldom if ever did expository teaching. The atmosphere was emotionally charged. A frequent remark made by those who "made a commitment to Christ" was "I got baptized, but it didn't take". Did his organization ever try to see how many "conversions" lasted? Did Graham say find a good bible-centered church? He got support from churches by not stealing "sheep".
If Christians really were to really understand the "Gospel", then they would understand that the Gospel is prevalent throughout the entirety of the Scriptures, starting with Genesis 3:15, and not just the "New Testament". (Perhaps we need to tear out that page in our Bibles which says "New Testament", between Malachi and Matthew.) There are representations of the Gospel throughout the OT. Just a few examples:
--Abel embraced the Gospel when he offered a blood sacrifice. His brother Cain rejected the Gospel.
--Abraham, by believing God, embraced the Gospel.
--Joseph, in telling his dreams to his brothers, was actually presenting the Gospel to them. His brothers rejected it. (The parallels between Joseph and Yeshua are too numerous to recount here.)
--Ruth, in choosing to go with Naomi, embracing Naomi's God and people, was thus grafted in to the Olive Tree; she embraced the Gospel of the Messiah of Israel. Her sister, Orpah, by her act of choosing to return to her pagan people, the Moabites, rejected the Gospel. Because Ruth chose to embrace the Gospel, she came into the ancestry of the Jewish Messiah.
--Likewise Rahab the prostitute in Jericho embraced the Gospel when she hid the Hebrew spies. She, too, is in the ancestry of Jesus because of her choice. She, too, was grafted in to the Olive Tree.
There are many, many more examples between the pages of Genesis and Malachi of the Gospel.
Amen. It always disturbed me how in Baptist theology there is a tendency to create a high wall between the OT and NT, almost as if one could remove 1/3 of their bible and not lose a thing. Some even push it to an extreme where you can ignore particular words of Jesus or John or Paul or whoever as those are "for the Jews" and not us. I know "baptist" isn't quite the right word to use, but it is the closest one I can think of and it seems to be the same hermetic that leads one to believe that the covenant sign is so distinct.
There is one God, one plan of salvation, one people of God, and the believers of the OT put their faith in the promised messiah just as Christians today do.
Who’s to say that Billy Graham and for that matter, Billy Sunday, did the most to bring people to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. What church Pastors then during the early 20th century and now are neglectful of is DECIPLESHIP follow through. Boy does this society need the likes of A. W. Tozer!
In modern day evangelism, this precious doctrine [of regeneration] has been reduced to nothing more than a human decision to raise one's hand, walk an aisle, or pray a 'sinner's prayer.' As a result, the majority of Americans believe that they've been 'born again' even though their thoughts, words, and deeds are a continual contradiction to the nature and will of God.
Paul Washer
As far as I know, Billy always worked with local churches, knowing that his message was only part of the conversion process. You're reaching. However, I do agree that many churches are surrending to our culture. The results or state of our country scream that.
Very interested to hear more about finneys theology- would make for a great and relevant video
Sensationalist headline with insufficient evidence presented in the video to prove the premise. If you want to critque these men so we can learn from their mistakes, then do so. But to say they "destroyed" Christendom? Hardly. Like many I don't know a lot about Finney, but I've heard Graham preach - and it is gospel - which is exactly what unbelievers nees to hear. Unfortunately, many people who heard that Gospel never actually repented or never grew in faith or spiritual maturity. But I'd put that more on the church's lack of discernment and teaching then the evangelist himself. If preaching the gospel in person to more souls then maybe anyone else in history is "destroying" Christendom, well then God help us all.
Phil 1:18 "What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, and yea will rejoice."
I found out recently that Billy Graham had a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
This guys sits in a seat .admits he has 1 -not read all of finnys writings on the topic with added jibe and insult in a very ungodly manner.
2- stated obvious bias and dislike of finny and name calling him .
3 brings unfounded and railing accusation against finny.
There could not be a less qualified person to sit in judgment of the man.
The words of Yeshua are the gold standard. Any red-letter Christian who reads
and applies the words of Yeshua cannot fail. Paul, who? Billy, who?
Charles Finney was an apostle of revivals. Outside of the Bible, no other man understood and promoted revivals like Charles Grandison Finney. Among God's real Generals, the man, Finney, comes very close to Apostle Paul.
Saying that Finney destroyed Christendom is one of the most foolish statements anyone could make. I am quite confident that, in God's books, Finney occupies a prominent place among the blessed.
There’s been a justifiable reassessment of Billy Graham by many contemporary Christians, and for good reason. I know this will make many senior saints’ heads explode, but I would definitely recommend that he be avoided.
Another one who I’d avoid, the more I hear about his theology, is CS Lewis. Very doctrinally unsound (believed in evolution, believed Adam and Eve were allegorical, believed salvation could be lost, etc). He honestly reminds me of an early Tim Keller; what with the talking in philosophical riddles rather than a direct answer.
In some ways, I find Lewis' theology to be regrettable, especially in matters of soteriology, but what is this stuff about "avoiding" him supposed to mean? That's not even language I would use for atheist/agnostic authors like Graham Oppy or Paul Draper.
Christian theologians and philosophers should make a habit of reading material they disagree with, lest they become hermits stuck in some self-imposed academic ghetto.
@@Jimmy-iy9pl If there’s a question as to whether someone was even saved?? Yes, that is justification enough to avoid them.
There are certainly men who I can disagree with on individual issues, but have no reason to doubt their salvation:
-I like AW Tozer even though he wasn’t Reformed.
-I like John Piper even though he really dropped the ball with that article regarding Trump and Biden right before the 2020 election.
-I like Al Mohler even though I wish he would have signed that statement condemning the social justice movement.
-I like John MacArthur even though I’m not a dispensationalist.
etc.
The commonality with those individuals who I mentioned, is, they preach(ed) the Gospel.
Billy Graham preached the “sinners prayer”. CS Lewis preached “philosophy”.
@user-rf6uo9to3g I'd say we need to use extra caution with "Christian" authors, but it might still be fine to read books like Chronicles of Narnia. Then again, maybe we should have a list of fiction stories from authors who didn't believe in a different gospel.
@@myrealnameisjohndoe116 I’d agree with that.
Funny you should mention the Narnia books, because I like Lewis when he sticks to fiction. Very talented writer. His theology, not so much.
To the latter part of what you shared, “Pilgrim’s Progress” comes immediately to mind.
"Senior Saints" had very poor discernment. I dont think the silent generation is any better than Gen Z. Sure the silent generation is overwhelmingly "christian" but it is overwhelmingly a nominal, cultural christianity. Every once in a while, who will meet a "senior saint" who truly believes and understands the gospel
Then I suppose you find fault with Spurgeon, and William Booth the founder of the salvation Army as well. They both used Finney's teaching in their ministries. What about Leonard Ravenshill? He also preaches the same no nonsense Christianity as Finney did.
Through what l have personally observed of those who critersize Charles Finney's teaching do so because Finney's taught a no comromise gospel which demands a total surrender; as he put it "to the cause of Christ". He made it very clear that if Christ was not Lord of all then He is not Lord at ALL. He made remarks such as:-"If your commitment to Jesus does not stop you from sinning, then He cannot stop you from going to hell"either.
After all Jesus came to save His people from sin; not to save them in their sin.
In a time where the only means of personal transport was a horse, there were also no PA systems, It is said that Finney led over seven hundred and fifty thousand souls to the Lord, of which it is said that over 70% of his converts remain faithful to the Lord to the end. How many souls have you led to the Lord with all the convince of modern day equipment?
How many of your converts stay faithful to the Lord, 20% or perhaps 30%?
How many people have fallen under the conviction of the Holy Spirit just by your presents in their company?
Revivals are still being initiated by Finney's lectures on how to promote revivals, to this day.
The problem with today's "church" is there is far too much world in it and very few people willing to "deny" themselves and take up their cross daily and follow Christ. With Finney it was "all" or "nothing". NO COMPROMISE AT ALL.
Not up for blue-on-blue fire today. It’s too much like criticizing Paul for being insufficiently pro-marriage.
Are you going to do a video on the Jesus revolution movie? My niece was asking me questions and I knew that I disagreed with it but I don't know much.
Well, it’s riddled with heresy but other than that I guess it’s okay 😬
Believe 4 things listed in 1 Cor 15:3b-8 (vs 2 proves it) and do the 1 thing emphasized 3 times in Romans 10:9-13 To Be SAVED! The Bible doesn't just hint or outline it, it directly specifies each specific belief and that specific WORK, believe it, that we must do to be saved. THAT is what separates the false from the true Christian, according to the Scriptures.
JMac did not have kind words for Billy Graham's work upon his death which I was surprised to hear. Even as you say it I don't want to believe that his ministry was the forerunner to the 'mega church', 'mega church personality' and ecumenical trend.
One of the things that just killed me was learning that Graham had 'decoy sinners' (that's my term) in the stands whose role it was to leave their seat and head down to the altar on cue. The idea was that they would 'break the ice' for actual sinners who were too embarrased to be first. (I know of a church that does this during 'worship' in order to generate more expressive participation on a wider scale.) Both strike me as gimmicky and unbiblical.
My memory of the people streaming down towards the altar during his crusades is forever marred by this knowledge. Of course, many people responded did come to Christ but the image of it was 'enhanced' by this trickery.
It's difficult criticizing grandfatherly old men who love the Lord, though, and that goes for JMac and Graham.
At the end of billy graham's life he said Jesus was not the only way
One thing that saddened me was seeing the Graham/Schuller talk where Graham supported universalism. The wider road. So many people who are being decieved.
@@loiscarteaux9389 Sad indeed...
Graham’s outright pro abortion stance was shocking to me.
@@oldman8277 Oh, goodness. Hadn't heard that 😶
The only thing I heard in this video was two men talking smack of generals of the faith and other christian camps, without any proof or any examples nor did they expound on what they were defending.
If you were there, or understand those times, ecumenicalism was overwhelming. Almost everyone was pulled in to some extent. And pre-internet if you weren't ex-catholic, knew a reliable source or bought a dogma (if there was a catholic bookstore near you) you thought we were pretty much the same. He also recanted much of this later. I think everyone agrees now his methods were problematic, but again that is what everyone did, and the denominations that didn't were dying. It seemed to make sense. Be humble and remember to some extent you are a product of the times you live in.
Divorce itself is heresy. "Do not let man separate." ;)
Sadly, the heresies of Calvinists surpass these goofy Finney types.
I think it was Billy Sunday, but might have been Charles Finney, who said if he can have 15 minutes in a room alone with someone he'd get a decision for Christ out of that person. Wrangling a decision sounds more like the work of a con man than an evangelist.
Re Billy Graham, my pastor is from Charlotte, NC. His grandfather was on the Graham prayer team whenever Graham did a crusade in the area. I'm not 100% but I think he said his grandfather came to Christ through Billy Graham. Certainly, Graham was a huge influence. They were Christian Evangelical Alliance members.
Knowing the terror of the Lord, I PERSUADE men
It will be interesting if the next revisions of the ESV, NLT and NIV allow for female pastors, and really water down homosexuality. I suspect so based on the "translators" currently active for these versions.
Don’t forget the damage Dispensationalism has done.
"If you love Me, obey my commands."
If half the people who "went forward" in BG's crusades were truly Saved, this country would be radically Christian.
Exactly
At the 1:10 mark you said, “It seems like with that rise of decisionism and emotionalism…um…this emphasis on man and his will and his choices…”
How, or better yet WHY do you preach the gospel if you don’t believe people can decide for Christ? Finney’s ministry was an attempt to give peace to those who had no idea how to come to Christ. How do YOU share the good news?
Quite a negative take on the destruction of christendom by postmillenial.
Postmil and premil just say “we win in the end,” not that things are going to be rosy before then
Any particular examples? I hope you aren't talking about groups that are superficially related but are really quite separate from anyting Reformed Theology teaches, like NAR, and are speaking of historical postmil as found through church history. If there are real problems, I'd like to hear them rather than a drive by accusation that goes against what Jesus taught about how to accuse you brothers in the faith.
But only by God’s eternal decretive will, right? 🤔
Correct.
Jesus came for 2 reasons. He was the Jewish Messiah and the Savior of the Chosen. His earthly ministry was to the Jew and not to Gentiles per sea. Paul's ministry was to the Gentiles. Although their messages did differ in some areas because of the differences in their ministries, they did not contradict any biblical doctrines. Jesus spoke more on the lines of the Law to the Jew who had a false understanding of the Law. He kept showing the Jew that they had a wrong understanding of the whole system that they clung to. I think some of you folks don't seem to understand that the Christisn has died to the law. Which brings up the natural question that Paul deals with when presented with the first thing thar comes to mind when a person actually contemplates the fact that a Christian is not under law. The question comes up because they do not understand that the born again have moved into Grace. This new spiritual realm moves a Christian up the ground of spiritual growth through the indwelling Spirit and not by or through any part of the written law. Death to self is not accomplished by Law-keeping. This is the message of Job. He had to learn that his relationship to God was not a quid pro quo doing obedience relationship. It was finally understanding that God was the "author " AND FINISHER. So many Christians never get to the promised land of PEACE with God because they think they have to personally do do do instead of understanding that it is understanding the great reality is not "DO" but "DONE". One of the best teachers on this is William R Newell.
Brothers it would be better if you would go and preach Gospel to unbelievers, rather than criticizing men who devoted their life's for leading people to the Christ.
Absolutely 👍
Wow the pride here is unreal. I'm out.
Overstatement, desperately seeking nuance.
Are you calling a great man of God "wicked"!!!
Calvinists are so smug thry think their thoughts are scripture
Billy Graham always said now go find a church and live out the gospel. I don’t get this discussion.
Perhaps we should be called people of the way as the first believers did.
With malice toward none.
May the Lamb that was slain receive the reward of His suffering.
May we know what spirit we are of.
I frankly am unable to justify harshness regarding how others understand salvation if their love and devotion to God is real. My setting is closer to Finney's position than it is to Pastor Joel's. I and we have a lot of concern that Calvinists aren't concerned about sin or holiness. But we aren't exempt from the problem either.
First megachurch was catholic church.
THERE is NO straight line from Finny to Billy graham . ANYONE who bothers to look into Finny's teaching would KNOW that Finny would be horrified wioth the present day alter call methods and teachings This is an accusation session without any evidence presented .Based on a shocking misrepresentation .it is Shameful
You clowns are slowly slipping into A Handmaids Tale.
True!
In the Christian world, there is phenomenon I don’t comprehend. Some professed Christians say they are saddened by the disagreements among Christians - and then turn right around and dogmatically proclaim doctrines with which not all professed Christians agree.
I’m not opposed to denominations or even local congregations having doctrinal or behavioral criteria for voting membership but, offhand, I can think of only one thing that persuades me someone who professes to be a Christian isn’t a Christian - failure to admit being a sinner. I can consider someone to be “wrong” about any of several doctrines and still consider that person to be a Christian.
There may be a sense in which a person is not a “true” Christian who isn’t willing to consider doctrinal points with which he has been taught to disagree. Closed-mindedness tends to lead to spiritual pride so I wouldn’t be inclined to elect to any office in the church someone who is so “confident” about doctrine as to dismiss as not Christian anyone who doesn't subscribe to a creed.
You just asserted a creed and declared that people who don’t subscribe to it should be disfellowshipped
You are seriously in error over Finney. I'm Calvinist thoroughly but I read most of Finney's works many times like about 20 years ago. Augustus Strong (a Reformed Theologian) said of Finney's theology that if you accept Finney's presumptions you have to agree with his conclusions. Finney was a sharp logical mind using his lawyer skills to come up with a coherent system. He was thoroughly Orthodox in most areas. I don't agree with his presumptions but Leighton Flowers is one today who does.
I think the brothers were little too harsh on Billy. I don’t you can blame him for the rise of mega churches
Nah... Billy Graham was the pioneer/forefather of the Evanjelly megachurches
@@myrealnameisjohndoe116 Charles Spurgeon had a mega church.
It seems to me that you hold theology and intellectualism as an idol in your life. Secondly, who are you to judge or raise your hand against the Lords anointed? While Charles Finney and Billy Graham were not perfect, they led hundreds of thousands of people to true conversion in Christ.
How can you call the Second Great Awakening not so great? Souls were saved by the scores and throughout many documented accounts, they showed evidence of salvation the decades following.
Repent for your unbelief and idolatry
Click bait title!🤔😮😄
I’d have to disagree with Free Guy.
First , Joel is not judging Billy in the way of 1 Cor 4:5 context . You need to understand the situation of the church of Corinth and so the context out of which the statement is made , and therefore the context the evaluation from these 2 guys of Billy comes from .which is not what we see in 1 Cor 4:5 . Whether cowardliness or ignorance or a lil bit of both , in history we’ve seen that happen , drifting away from the truth to please the culture to avoid backlash and / or inventing new ways to get people to Christ and one is minimizing Christ to a just loving guy and savior rather than HOLY HOLY HOLY GOD who’s KING AND LORD over kings and lords. The gospel MUST reach all spheres of life as the gospel of The One who’s above ALL and that’s Christ, and so it MUST be preached that way , not sentimentalized and weak . I’m not here to flatter Joel or anything by the way . That’d be a sin . I believe God uses people as you said and no need for the adjective “flawed” as if we had flawed and flawless people . If it’s human is flawed , but wrong both teaching and doing , is to be exposed for the sake of truth and clarification and out of love for others whether followers or not, pointed especially when coming from someone we should definitely expect better from based on what they’ve shown up to that moment . Billy was part of those with that wealth of knowledge at his disposal
That’s my opinion
I want to say this carefully on the internet and I am happy to have pushback: I've been mulling over a thought that all this traces back to a particular line of thinking that came out in the reformation of the sovereign individual or a very individualistic understanding of salvation. It broke out immediately in the Anabaptist movements but then again throughout the church. The move that Luther was forced to make because of the thorough corruption of the church seems to have begun to undermine all authority. How can you have a Christendom when you grant everyone with their bible and their own novel interpretations the right to reject all authority over them if in their judgement the authority is wrong. You then have no true authority. Everyone is an authority to himself and does what is right in his own eyes. I don't think there was much of alternative because Luther's reading was largely correct and the abuses were evidently false. But can we go back and question some of the foundations of the reformation and check if they're totally solid? We might have gotten justification down pat and blown a gapping hole in church authority. It seems the early church thought much about this authority but we do not. Again I'm not sure about this all just been mulling it over. Also I understand that both Calvin and Luther would not say that anyone can pick up their bible and reject all other authority but I am wondering if they have a solid foundation for rejecting someone elses reformation or if it was compromised?
The foundations of the reformation are not wrong. Everyone should have access to the Bible, that does not translate into granting everyone the several authority to determine q what is doctrine. You have conflated the two
@@cosmictreason2242 I didn't conflate the two Evangelical (Baptist/Non-denominational/pietistic?) America seems to have conflated the two. I'm not sure precisely what the solution is or where it went off but something seems amiss. I know Calvin and Luther were far more concerned to be catholic in their theology than the modern teachers.
@@MrSeanschickens your terminology is a false premise
@@cosmictreason2242 Huh? You don't seem to be dialoguing in a constructive way. I'm posing a question that I'm uncertain about and you're just throwing out statements, like conflated and my terminology is false. Engage the idea with some thoughts. I would love to hear them! I think you might have gotten angry when I suggested we look at the foundations of the reformation. My point was not that they were blankly wrong but perhaps they are not perfect. Perhaps there was a slight seed of an error that grew rather naturally into our current secularism.
It is a fact that very quickly in North America people started pushing against any ecclesiastical authority. I think there were revolutionary presupposition that led to what we had have today. Civil and Ecclesiastical anarchy. I mean Thomas Paine was ardently anti-christian and he expressly says he hoped for a revolt against religious rule analogous to that against civil rule. His common sense might have been wicked sense.
@@MrSeanschickens bud, that’s not an error in the reformation. That’s a necessary side effect of decentralization
I understand the discussion around Billy Graham; but I don't understand the discussion around Charles Finney. Are there some resources that I can research to understand this? And how did Finney hate God and His Word? And the comment about his intelligence is something I do not understand, @RightResponseMinistries. He was a lawyer that gave up his practice to became a preacher, was he not? Was not his meetings pre-dated by Daniel Nash praying weeks before his meetings? Did his meetings not change the towns he preached in? I ask this not in rhetorical fashion: for I truly seek to understand something I don't know about him. Maybe I'm missing something, and I am ok with understanding my mistake; but can I have some books or materials to read for research? Thank you for your ministry.
Why does Pastor Joel care so much about denominational distinctives? I agree with his comment about Gospel Myopathy. I’ve been criticizing it myself. But a while back he said he die on the hill of the pastor has no one above him because that makes him a Baptist. Who the hell cares if there is a Presbytery?
Why do you not care?
@@cosmictreason2242 Why does it matter? It is not salvation issue. I'd be hard pressed to call it a secondary issue.
@@charmolypi999 And where is that in the Bible? Salvation issues are as follows: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me." (1 Corinthians 15:3-8) This is a creed that is dated by believers and unbelievers to 32-37 AD.
@@charmolypi999 I hate religious fluff, you don’t need bishops to have a church. The church is centred around Jesus Christ. You say no salvation, read your Bible, salvation is available to all who will humble themselves and repent and ask Christ to forgive them and save them .
@@charliedontsurf334 now that’s good news ✌️
I actually agree with male headship, but the ECO Presbyterian church that I go to (first Presbyterian church I've ever been apart of) is egalitarian. Not sure if it's a deal breaker for me, but I just think that's funny that this is a reformed video talking about how reformed denominations honor men being in leadership...
I'd say he is right in general, and that Reformed Theology teaches that man is totally depraved, so even our own denominations don't always get everything right. We should always be on guard for error, even in our own circles. He calls out particular Reformed pastors in other videos, and so seems pretty even handed and not just circling the wagons around Reformed Christianity.
I don't know anything about the ECO, but from a quick glance they seem more liberal than most Presbyterian denominations, though still a bit more conservative than PC(USA).
Baloney. The reason you don't like Finney is that he came to reject Calvinism. You don't like Billy Graham for the same reason. People come to Christ first, then you can teach your John Calvin to them. Hopefully they will reject Calvin then, like most Christians do.
Boys, you are making a mistake here. Billy Graham presented a faithful gospel. He won many to Christ and that is what counts. You are making a mistake here...a pretty bad one
How sad these guys, waste of time.Who gave them this sad minustry of accusation and criticism.
"Myopticism", what's that mean? Couldn't find it on google. Serious question btw.
At the 6:19 mark
I think he meant myopia
@@gymratnoah2259 To be myopic is to have blurred vision (particularly nearsightedness). The Biblical Myopicism he mentions is to not make the same clear distinctions the Bible makes but to blur together various teaching in an illicit way. the suffix "-ism" makes it about an overall theory or doctrine or approach to religion. So the word implies that they aren't just a bit blind to what the bible is saying, but are making blurring the lines of scripture their whole approach to the Bible.
@oracleoftroy thank you! Was sorta stuck on that and it felt like a key point he was trying to make.
btw these 2 guys make no sense whatsoever, = RELIGIOUS folks,
You should use the wording of your Lutheran brethren: gospel reductionism
So you are judging Billy Graham? Are you nuts? I’ll never watch another one of your videos
Funny handshake brigade
Bible Center Christian.
Billy, at best, is a “yet through fire” guy.
Fortunately we have you and James White to straighten everyone out
All I’m hearing is , we don’t have the Holy Spirit but luckily we have you and James white.
Lover of men.
@@markshaneh I think he was joking, I hope
Satanic message
If you want a example of someone destroying Christendom just look at augustinian Calvinism are you kidding
There is NOTHING ‘cool’ about mega churches!
Calvin is in Hell and Calvinism has always been blasphemy