I totally agree with your assessment of the Billy Graham business, mostly because I would do the same in a similar situation. Anyway, in my opinion, it is dangerous ground to begin trying to separate what a person says, with the way a person is. What comes to mind is, our lovely ex-Pres., Billy. There was no difference in his conduct, either personally or professionally. And yet there were attempts, to make it so. That is a recipe for disaster. And how many diasaters did we witness in that scenario?
...Getting back to being pressed on an issue. To me, that sparks of trying to put someone in a cage. No one likes that, and they will fight to get out. That sounds exactly like what happened in the altercation beteen MacArthur and the other guy.
...In reality, what is happening is the fella is playing readers like a filddle. And them kind of people get a, SHAME ON YOU, from me...
I had overlooked this, so pardon the delay:
I wouldn't commend someone to the teachings of a man of great works, just on the basis of his works. If Graham were promoting heresy, I would concur with criticism of him.
But what was quoted of Graham was not the promotion of heresy, but the exaggeration of a spontaneous response into the thrust of his ministry. That's what I thought was unfair. Furthermore, the man correcting Graham also made very grave errors.
Contrariwise, this man is teaching this nonsense in a very academic manner.
>> There was no difference in his conduct, either personally or professionally. And yet there were attempts, to make it so. <<
I do find it appropriate the an evangelist would keep his rebukes private.