I was debating whether to put my 2 cents worth in this topic, but thought I'd contribute by offering a few definitions and disclaimers.
The word, "Christian" has come to mean a variety of things to different people. The original definition, coming from the Bible, just simply refers to the people who followed the Christ (Jesus). Those were folks that put their faith in Him as Lord & Savior. A few hundred years later, when Rome adopted Christianity as the State religion, the Roman citizens were ipso-facto considered to be christians. This is not unlike what we have in America, where this country has been often referred to as a christian nation.
To a Jew or a Muslim, anyone who has any religious identification with a christian denomination, they are considered to be "christian". To many, but not all Americans who have a Protestant or Catholic affiliation, they consider themselves, to varying degrees, as christian. More than likely they are what is called, "christian in name only" or nominally christian, and not to be confused with those who call themselves, "Born Again".
And now to Mr. Falwell...Another way of looking at American christianity is that of the categories of "Liberal", "Moderate", and "Conservative". And the Conservatives can be categorized as being either Evangelicals or Fundamentalsists.
Fundamentalists tend to be much more conservative than the "Conservatives" and tend to see issues in terms of right or wrong. They also strongly see the justice side of an issue, far more than they see the compassionate or merciful side. It's like having a parent who says "no" a lot but without providing alternatives to that "no". They tend toward not only, "hating the sin", but strugling to NOT "hate the sinner". And that PO's a lot of people off. The "Liberals are quite the opposite - full of compassion, but far less willing to call something sin.
But the Bible, both Old & New Testament, is balanced. You can't have one without the other. Justice and mercy MUST work together in order to do any good. For all those people who see the O.T. as being reflective of an overwhelmingly angry God and the N.T. as being the opposite, better look more closely.
Getting back to Falwell, he is best characterized as being a Fundamentalist Christian, with that tendency to see things in "black & white", right & wrong, without much in the way of compassion. He was out of balance and that doesn't sit well with people. It doesn't sit well with "evangelicals", who see things more balanced.
I would say that Mr. Falwell represented an extreme and out of balance segment of Christianity. Is it any wonder that he angered a lot of people?