When criticizing an evangelical idol like Billy Graham, one is often challenged with the claim that, as so much good is done, faults should be overlooked. Setting aside the seriousness of the faults in question, and the corresponding impossibility of letting them slide, we need to ask, has so much good really been done? Are these methods which we deplore really producing as advertised?
The record says, “No.”
In 1968 the Evangelical Alliance, BGEA’s first sponsor in Britain, published a report on evangelism that included a survey of eighty-five churches which had participated in Graham’s shorter London crusades of 1966–67. Its authors (a large committee) concluded:
On mass evangelism generally, the recurring theme was that the crusade did not make a lasting effect on the complete outsider. Even when they went, they either made no response, or made no lasting response . . . Church members, whether they went forward or not, found blessing and encouragement from the services, but the complete outsider tended to go back outside again. in the words of one comment, ‘If they asked, “What shall we do?” they seem to have been given little answer beyond “to decide for Christ” . . . On inquiry they were unable to give any real answer as to what this meant, other than they desired to live a better life.—Iain Murray, Evangelicalism Divided (Banner of Truth, 2000), 56–57.
Now, let’s go back a century and a half and examine the record of one of Graham’s most famous predecessors. Charles Finney preceded Graham in implementing results-oriented methods. Finney claimed that the right use of the right means was guaranteed to produce conversions, and there is no denying that his methods produced massive results. But what results? In Revival and Revivalism, Iain Murray reported that
. . . the permanent results were considerably fewer than had initially been claimed. In the course of time, Finney himself admitted this. Joseph Ives Foot, a Presbyterian minister, wrote in 1838: ‘During ten years, hundreds, perhaps thousands, were annually reported to be converted on all hands; but now it is easily admitted, that his [Finney’s] real converts are comparatively few. It is declared even by himself, that “the great body of them are a disgrace to religion”.’—Iain Murray, Revival and Revivalism (Banner of Truth, 1994), 288–289.
TrackBack URL: http://www.thirstytheologian.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1482
Share this post:
Posted in: Billy Graham · Charles Finney · Church History · Evangelicalism Divided · Iain Murray · Revival & Revivalism
Link · 2 Comments · 0 TrackBacks
← Previous · Home · Next →
2 Comments:
#1 || 10·08·18··19:29 || Kim in ON
I've got Revival and Revivalism in my "on deck" pile of books.
That picture of Finney is downright scary-looking.
#2 || 10·08·30··12:56 || Daniel
That any were converted is a profound testimony to God's grace. I am always humbled by the knowledge that it is not me or my presentation, but God who opens our understanding that we may receive the truth and be saved.
Comments on this post are closed. If you have a question or comment concerning this post, feel free to email us.