Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         14
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Billy Graham


JerryNumbers
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Lady Administrators
Just now, John Yurich said:

If Graham has preached the biblical doctrine of salvation in his Crusades then logically that means that he does not believe that stuff he stated in those articles.

That is then even more egregious. Because if he is preaching salvation and then lying about other things he supposedly believes, then logically folks who are lost will reject salvation because Graham is a liar about everything else he believes.

Your logic falls apart simply on the basis that we have no choice but to believe what a person says when they assert their belief in something. You do not know his mind, so you cannot definitively state that he doesn't believe what he says he believes. It is circular reasoning at best which has no logically sound outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
19 minutes ago, HappyChristian said:

That is then even more egregious. Because if he is preaching salvation and then lying about other things he supposedly believes, then logically folks who are lost will reject salvation because Graham is a liar about everything else he believes.

Your logic falls apart simply on the basis that we have no choice but to believe what a person says when they assert their belief in something. You do not know his mind, so you cannot definitively state that he doesn't believe what he says he believes. It is circular reasoning at best which has no logically sound outcome.

Well the fact is that millions have become saved over the years in the Billy Graham Crusades. When Graham made  those statements in  those articles he must have been suffering from some kind of mental problems to make statements that he would never have made during his Crusades. That is why I don't believe those articles about Graham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

1 John 4:1-5

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.

 

My mouth may profess "Jesus". I may even use a King James Bible, but what does my "spirit" really say? What do I really say between the lines while I promote Catholicism. "Universal salvation" and "New Age" stuff?  If anyone was saved, at a Billy Graham crusade, it was because they heard some of the Word of God. The Bible says "my word shall not return unto me void"(paraphrased). And God even used Balaam to a point. Billy Graham has done a lot of good things, some of which I admire greatly. So who am I to judge? But when we hear something that isn't doctrinal, we are to take notice and beware because there are wolves out there which look every bit like a sheep. It's easier if I put zero confidence in Billy Graham, Charles Spurgeon or any other man, even my own pastor, even MYSELF.  We're all fallible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
7 hours ago, heartstrings said:

1 John 4:1-5

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.

 

My mouth may profess "Jesus". I may even use a King James Bible, but what does my "spirit" really say? What do I really say between the lines while I promote Catholicism. "Universal salvation" and "New Age" stuff?  If anyone was saved, at a Billy Graham crusade, it was because they heard some of the Word of God. The Bible says "my word shall not return unto me void"(paraphrased). And God even used Balaam to a point. Billy Graham has done a lot of good things, some of which I admire greatly. So who am I to judge? But when we hear something that isn't doctrinal, we are to take notice and beware because there are wolves out there which look every bit like a sheep. It's easier if I put zero confidence in Billy Graham, Charles Spurgeon or any other man, even my own pastor, even MYSELF.  We're all fallible. 

Well put sir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
14 hours ago, HappyChristian said:

Billy Graham, over the years, went his own way rather than sticking completely with scripture. He was warned by a number of men who saw the trail he was beginning to take. He chose to ignore the warnings of men like Dr. John R. Rice, Dr. Bob Jones I, Dr. Charles Woodbridge, etc (and I'm not lifting any of those men up - just naming a few names of well-known men who rebuked Graham early on).  As early as 1957 Graham had modernists (120 of them) on his crusade committee.

While there have been people saved via Graham's ministry, that does not excuse his disobedience - any more than some fruit in ministry excuses ANY sin on the part of ANYone. 

We can choose to believe or not believe whatever we want (although it is illogical to disbelieve that what someone claims to believe - and teaches it over the years - is what they actually believe). But the Bible tells us "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." Graham's mouth spoke what was in his heart, and a good bit of it was heresy.

Graham must have been suffering from some kind of mental disorder in order for him to make those statements that he did not make during his Crusades. That is the only logical explanation as to why he made those statements when he preached the biblical doctrine of salvation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, John Yurich said:

Graham must have been suffering from some kind of mental disorder in order for him to make those statements that he did not make during his Crusades. That is the only logical explanation as to why he made those statements when he preached the biblical doctrine of salvation.

So you would rather have him being mentally unstable?

That doesn't make his preaching any more reliable.

How can we tell when he was in his right mind?

The plsin fact is that in many different fora over a period of years he made statements such as those recorded above, statements that are cleatly inconsistent with biblical salvation.

Unless you can provide proof of this mental instability that you suggest, we are forced to accept that his belief was unbiblical.

Do you have any sources that question his mental faculty over the years in support of your assertion?

By the way, the fact of people saved under his preaching is not disputed, but they would not be the only people saved in spite of, not because of, what a preacher actually believed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 4/24/2017 at 0:50 PM, John Yurich said:

Totally false. Graham has never preached a false gospel as he has always preached in his Crusades the biblical doctrine of salvation that salvation comes only through giving ones life to Christ and trusting in Him alone for salvation.

You have a lot to learn about Mr. Graham sir.  Even in the 1930s we have quotes from him preaching an accursed gospel.

Having dinner with Graham, President G. W. Bush asked him a question about Christianity and he said some people were born Christians.

His fruit is rotten.  Franklin is worse, not better.

Franklin was dumb enough to foot the bill for a hospital in North Korea, complete with all the latest medical technology and backup generators.  Anyone with an ounce of brains knows that this will only be used for Party Members and for propaganda purposes, such as when they hit Graham up for more money or when Michael Moore comes to town for a documentary on national healthcare.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators
11 hours ago, John Yurich said:

Graham must have been suffering from some kind of mental disorder in order for him to make those statements that he did not make during his Crusades. That is the only logical explanation as to why he made those statements when he preached the biblical doctrine of salvation.

What he was "suffering from" is sin. Period. There are many people who teach/preach salvation and yet have bad doctrine in other areas. Sin. Not a mental disorder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

There are 2 things that bother me most about Billy Graham's crusades of the past.
#1. He made an AGREEMENT with the Catholic church to turn over to them (give them their names) any catholic person who came forward during his style of altar call at any of his crusades. He was so well liked by the priests that they gave him an honorary degree (Belmont Abbey College - 1967). Now if a certain person does not WANT to believe this, look up the factual evidence of it.

#2. And this (to me) is MORE troublesome, because I heard this same rhetoric in many Baptist churches over the years... HIS version of "salvation" was "ask Jesus into your heart". Is that the gospel? No. The ACTUAL gospel is found in 1 Cor.15:1-4. It is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. That Christ DIED FOR OUR SINS!!! (underline and bold emphasis placed there by me)

1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures

What is required of us? BELIEF/faith. (John 3:16-18, Rom.10:9-10, Eph.2:8-9, John 14:6,  et al). What do we BELIEVE??? The gospel!!! That Christ died for our sins, was  buried, was resurrected 3 days later.
We BELIEVE in our hearts, we CONFESS with our mouths, but no-where does the gospel state "ask Jesus into your heart"... that is NOT scriptural. That IS another gospel.  That is 'easy-believism' with the person often times having never even heard the actual GOSPEL, nor comprehending that Jesus died for their sins (and was buried and resurrected).!

Paul continues on in that chapter (1 Cor.15) to expound on GRACE, he also expounds on the resurrection that WE (as believers) will also have at the rapture, with a description of the rapture in that chapter as well.

Any "gospel" that does NOT present the death (that Jesus died for our sins), the burial, and the resurrection is a FALSE GOSPEL. Paul warns us that there are some who would "pervert the gospel of Christ". (Gal.1:7) He further gives more warning in verses 8-9
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

I don't care whom the pastor is... Billy Graham or any other... whomever is preaching any gospel in the age of grace OTHER than the gospel as set forth in 1 Cor.15:1-4, it is a FALSE GOSPEL. 

 


 

Edited by Ronda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
20 hours ago, Ronda said:

There are 2 things that bother me most about Billy Graham's crusades of the past.
#1. He made an AGREEMENT with the Catholic church to turn over to them (give them their names) any catholic person who came forward during his style of altar call at any of his crusades. He was so well liked by the priests that they gave him an honorary degree (Belmont Abbey College - 1967). Now if a certain person does not WANT to believe this, look up the factual evidence of it.

#2. And this (to me) is MORE troublesome, because I heard this same rhetoric in many Baptist churches over the years... HIS version of "salvation" was "ask Jesus into your heart". Is that the gospel? No. The ACTUAL gospel is found in 1 Cor.15:1-4. It is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. That Christ DIED FOR OUR SINS!!! (underline and bold emphasis placed there by me)

1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures

What is required of us? BELIEF/faith. (John 3:16-18, Rom.10:9-10, Eph.2:8-9, John 14:6,  et al). What do we BELIEVE??? The gospel!!! That Christ died for our sins, was  buried, was resurrected 3 days later.
We BELIEVE in our hearts, we CONFESS with our mouths, but no-where does the gospel state "ask Jesus into your heart"... that is NOT scriptural. That IS another gospel.  That is 'easy-believism' with the person often times having never even heard the actual GOSPEL, nor comprehending that Jesus died for their sins (and was buried and resurrected).!

Paul continues on in that chapter (1 Cor.15) to expound on GRACE, he also expounds on the resurrection that WE (as believers) will also have at the rapture, with a description of the rapture in that chapter as well.

Any "gospel" that does NOT present the death (that Jesus died for our sins), the burial, and the resurrection is a FALSE GOSPEL. Paul warns us that there are some who would "pervert the gospel of Christ". (Gal.1:7) He further gives more warning in verses 8-9
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

I don't care whom the pastor is... Billy Graham or any other... whomever is preaching any gospel in the age of grace OTHER than the gospel as set forth in 1 Cor.15:1-4, it is a FALSE GOSPEL. 
 

I strongly agree with you here Ronda.  It has been said on here recently that some perspons accepted Jesus so were baptised.  

I don't think they should have been if that is all their testimony.  Of course there may be more to it than that, which was not said,

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, Invicta said:

I strongly agree with you here Ronda.  It has been said on here recently that some perspons accepted Jesus so were baptised.  

I don't think they should have been if that is all their testimony.  Of course there may be more to it than that, which was not said,

I don't know whom/what you are referencing, brother Invicta (sorry, cannot remember your name), but if the reason a person was baptized (by water, I assume you meant) was that they were expecting it to be a PART of their salvation, they are mistaken. 

I believe we are baptized by the Holy Spirit the moment we believe on Christ for salvation, and the the Holy Spirit indwells is unto the day of redemption. (And by that I must state that the GOSPEL is what we believe... that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and 3 days later arose). Water baptism is something APART from salvation... wherein we CHOOSE to willingly give an outward profession of the inward indwelling. 

As for WHAT the gospel is, I am adamant about this because God's word TELLS us what the gospel is in 1 Cor.15:1-4. This has caused much controversy over my lifetime because there are those who still cling to a "ask Jesus into your heart" so-called gospel, and that is not scriptural. I truly worry about their salvation. The gospel truly IS so simple a child can understand, but as long as it IS the gospel they actually are taught... not a watered down version. There is NO GOSPEL without the fact that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the 3rd day. Yes, I do worry that some are not believing the actual gospel and/or believing on Christ ALONE for salvation!  Paul worried over the same thing... (1 Cor.15:2) that some might "believe in vain"... that they weren't believing the actual gospel! So he laid it out again for them leaving no doubt as to what the gospel actually is (1 Cor.15:1-4)!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
13 hours ago, Invicta said:

My name is David.

Thank you, brother David. I always feel odd addressing someone by a user-name.  Now if I can REMEMBER your name it will be a wonderful feat! I could try to blame that on MS, but I've always been terrible with names. Please forgive me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On ‎5‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 11:05 AM, Invicta said:

Over tenty years ago, we went to a Baptist Church in Ashford.  While we were there Billy Graham came to England.  Our church was the only one in the town who did not join in to support Graham. 

Totally sick and demented that any Christian would be against Graham when he has always preached from the pulpit the biblical doctrine of salvation. Those statements that are attributed to Graham about Graham supposedly believing that salvation can come about apart from Jesus are totally false as he does not really believe those statements that he supposedly made that contradict the Bible but he was suffering from some kind of mental illness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

John, I hope you're trolling here. To say that he was suffering from some sort of mental illness when he said some things he said, but to stand and uphold other things he said, and to outright deny that he said certain things he is well known for, well, either you have no sense of reality in yourself, or you;'re just playing with us.

Billy Graham gave up basic solid Bible doctrine for the love and approval of the world a long time ago. He is an ecumenical compromiser, at best, and the fringe of heresy, at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, Ukulelemike said:

John, I hope you're trolling here. To say that he was suffering from some sort of mental illness when he said some things he said, but to stand and uphold other things he said, and to outright deny that he said certain things he is well known for, well, either you have no sense of reality in yourself, or you;'re just playing with us.

Billy Graham gave up basic solid Bible doctrine for the love and approval of the world a long time ago. He is an ecumenical compromiser, at best, and the fringe of heresy, at worst.

Every time I heard Graham preach on Television in his Crusades or otherwise it was always the biblical doctrine of salvation. So it is nonsense to state that he believed those statements that were against the Bible doctrine of salvation when he preached the biblical doctrine of salvation in his Crusades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

John, I have a question for you. Has Billy Graham done something for you and your family that makes you so fiercely attached to him? Perhaps were they saved at a crusade? You seem awfully determined to believe that he is totally above doctrinal reproach, so to speak.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, John Yurich said:

Totally sick and demented that any Christian would be against Graham when he has always preached from the pulpit the biblical doctrine of salvation. Those statements that are attributed to Graham about Graham supposedly believing that salvation can come about apart from Jesus are totally false as he does not really believe those statements that he supposedly made that contradict the Bible but he was suffering from some kind of mental illness.

How come every other church including Catholics supported him and why did he send "enquirers" back to their home dead churches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 5 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...