Comments on: Explaining Billy Graham

By: Michael Frost

Michael Frost — Fri, 15 Feb 2019 02:01:57 +0000

In reply to Dave Benson. Thanks Dave. Really appreciate it.

By: Jeremy W

Jeremy W — Thu, 14 Feb 2019 20:32:21 +0000

Mike, thanks so much for such a balanced article surrounding this ‘Giant’ of the Christian Faith. At a time where we read about the falls of Pastors such as Bill Hybels, it’s hard not to then be cynical about all…. but I always value your ways of thinking, and communicating that which we all should be aware of, but not driven by….

By: Dave Benson

Dave Benson — Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:40:37 +0000

Thanks for sharing, Mike. A balanced and gracious write, fairly questioning some of the present push–over which I’m truly divided–for a 60th anniversary ‘crusade’ (profoundly unhelpful language in a religiously pluralistic context). Praying there are some genuine ‘conversions’ during the Franklin Graham events, even as it’s neither the approach nor speaker I would prefer. Also celebrating a much fuller gospel, where these ridiculous left-right battles are put in their correct place, bowing to the vision of God’s peace-full reign. Blessings in your work in a new season, Dave.

By: Josh hinds

Josh hinds — Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:02:04 +0000

It’s fascinating how we write about history with such boldness and confidence. I can only comment on my experiences going to his crusades in the mid 90’s.

He spoke in Atlanta Georgia for 4 nights in 1994. On the first night he presented the Gospel in his traditional way after Johnny cash had led the worship. The next three nights he spent pleading with
the Christianss of Georgia to serve to needy across the state.

I remember with particular fondness the final evening where my brother and I by chance found our way into Ted Turner’s private suite to watch the proceedings.

By: UR

UR — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:24:18 +0000

Thank you. This was incredibly enlightening.

By: Mary

Mary — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:37:18 +0000

Appreciate your work so much

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 06:08:28 +0000

One could postulate that the Los Angeles crusades are a modern times equivalent of God hardening the heart of Pharoh to effect his will and purpose… affected the business community to get Billy going, got lots of people saved 😉 … but the counterpunch then becomes that much of the church has since spent decades wandering in the wilderness of personal pietism and prosperity gospel.

By: Michael Frost

Michael Frost — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 00:23:00 +0000

In reply to Evan Hadkins. Yes, by that time the momentum in the US was unstoppable and his fame had spread here. The BGEA also had the resources to fund such crusades around the world.

By: Evan Hadkins

Evan Hadkins — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 00:01:10 +0000

The US business campaign wasn’t present in Aus.

By: Michael Frost

Michael Frost — Mon, 11 Feb 2019 23:18:13 +0000

In reply to Ted Keating. He walked a very thin line on some social/political issues so as to not detract from his primary mission (evangelism). So he was a supporter of the civil rights movement, for example, (bailing MLK out of prison and desegregating the audiences at his crusades), but he refused to be outspoken on the issue. His circumspection on this issue disappointed many. He was burned by his association with Richard Nixon and resolved not to become co-opted by partisan politics ever again.