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.

David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I want to say if I was one of those...then....I seriously apologize. There was one time I felt David Cloud was awesome. Since then I'm really unhappy with how far he takes this "warning" thing. Its like NOTHING in IFB pleases him anymore. Its getting a little ridiculous.

I don't recall you doing that, but we are kind of on the same page. I once liked much from Cloud but over the years he seems to have become more antagonistic and also very defensive and quick to strike out against those who dare to ask him a question about his words or ministry. It does seem that he is drawing such a hard, sharp line, which goes in a small circle, that in order to meet his words we would have to isolate ourselves within the confines of our own churches, associate with no one else, fellowship with no one else, not preach, teach or reach out to anyone else. I don't think that's what he's trying to achieve, but it does seem to be the end result if we follow his words completely.

No doubt mainstream Christianity forsakes most aspects of separation, but it's possible to go too far with separation also. If we find ourselves hunkered down in individual fortress churches, having nothing to do with any others, we will be unable to fulfill many aspects we are called to in Scripture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I'm not bashing, but I guess that I'm a little surprised that the number of "right" churches must be less than I thought. Much of what Cloud says is accurate. If it wasn't for some of his warnings I would definitely be less "in-the-know." When I moved from MO to OH I figured it would be difficult to find a good church (and one that doesn't have a hint of falling away), and I was right. I miss my old church back in MO in many ways.

Unfortunately, the number of right church is going down, not up. Most of these "church plants" I'm seeing/hearing about, are disgruntled folk who just want to have things their way, or neos/liberals disguising themselves as IFBs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

My husband did write Cloud defending his home pastor (one of the pastors named) who is one of the straightest, narrowest IFB pastors you'll meet. The difference with him is that he does not choose "camps" to remain in. He preaches where he preaches if they are decent churches.

Obviously David Cloud is very strong in Secondary Separation but I don't know that God tells us to publicly and nationally name names of pastors as being "compromising" if the pastor himself and his church are straight down the line and right with God.

God doesn't appreciate criticism against men of God. My husband's pastor answers to God.....NOT David Cloud.

David Cloud's email to my husband was slightly egotistical and basically warning my husband for being uninformed since he has not read all of Cloud's books and materials. He maintained that he was right in publicly mentioning a good man's name from the pulpit. He even went so far as to say that he realizes the man is a good pastor and pastors a good church, but because he preached at the Sword Conference, he deserved to have his name publicly mentioned in his warning.

Can someone show me Scripture to show Cloud is not stepping out of bounds, here? I don't think so.... I think he needs to be careful before God starts sticking up for some of His Pastors.

All due respect ma'am, I think you're out of line yourself. The way you word your posts and the fact that you're a Moderator up here, I'd probably be safe in saying that you run your husband/house too. Get off the computer and back in your place. I'm done here. Good night all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

All due respect ma'am, I think you're out of line yourself. The way you word your posts and the fact that you're a Moderator up here, I'd probably be safe in saying that you run your husband/house too. Get off the computer and back in your place. I'm done here. Good night all.


:icon_rolleyes: Obviously she is a little upset because she feels like her husband was disrespected. Perfectly normal reaction. Your out of line and your accusations are foolish. Chill. :coffee2: Edited by Seth-Doty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

All due respect ma'am, I think you're out of line yourself. The way you word your posts and the fact that you're a Moderator up here, I'd probably be safe in saying that you run your husband/house too. Get off the computer and back in your place. I'm done here. Good night all.


Um...excuse me?

You have no clue who I am or how my HUSBAND'S household is run, nor what my "place" is. And you have no right to tell me what that "place" is.

If you think calling out good solid men of God and telling hundreds of churches that he is "wrong" by name, then that's fine...but I have every right to come here and discuss the fact that he just smeared the good name of a good man of God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

:icon_rolleyes: Obviously she is a little upset because she feels like her husband was disrespected. Perfectly normal reaction. Your out of line and your accusations are foolish. Chill. :coffee2:


Mostly my husband's pastor, which notice, I'm not even saying his name....thus, I feel Mr. Cloud was WAY out of line saying his name in a negative way. There is NO reason for anybody to publicly post an Independent Fundamental Baptist Pastor's name in a negative light, especially when they will admit the man is a "good Pastor" and has a "good church".

BTW thanks. :-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Serious question here: Who? Never heard of them before, I don't think.


Fundamental Baptist Fellowship and Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

There is NO reason for anybody to publicly post an Independent Fundamental Baptist Pastor's name in a negative light, especially when they will admit the man is a "good Pastor" and has a "good church".


You know I think we probably agree 98% of the time but I just don't see that. That kind of thinking is one of the things that eventually can lead to pastors going astray. If they are only exposed to people that either say they are wonderful or horrible it can become a temptation to believe the people who say they are wonderful and ignore all criticism. I have seen pastors like that and I am sure you have too. If someone says they consider so and so to still be a good pastor but think they have a fault in a given area what is the great harm in that? We say and believe pastors are just men and fallible so what is the problem with publicly naming names and saying you think so and so is wrong in a given area? You may or may not agree on a particular issue but why is it necessary to sweep all disagreements under the rug and publicly pretend that there is no disagreement until things get so bad they explode?

This is not referring to this situation in particular as I do not and never have read the "sword of the Lord" nor do I really know that "crowd" and thus have no opinion one way or another. More of a general observation. Edited by Seth-Doty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

My husband did write Cloud defending his home pastor (one of the pastors named) who is one of the straightest, narrowest IFB pastors you'll meet. The difference with him is that he does not choose "camps" to remain in. He preaches where he preaches if they are decent churches.

Obviously David Cloud is very strong in Secondary Separation but I don't know that God tells us to publicly and nationally name names of pastors as being "compromising" if the pastor himself and his church are straight down the line and right with God.

God doesn't appreciate criticism against men of God. My husband's pastor answers to God.....NOT David Cloud.

David Cloud's email to my husband was slightly egotistical and basically warning my husband for being uninformed since he has not read all of Cloud's books and materials. He maintained that he was right in publicly mentioning a good man's name from the pulpit. He even went so far as to say that he realizes the man is a good pastor and pastors a good church, but because he preached at the Sword Conference, he deserved to have his name publicly mentioned in his warning.

Can someone show me Scripture to show Cloud is not stepping out of bounds, here? I don't think so.... I think he needs to be careful before God starts sticking up for some of His Pastors.


To prove he stepped out of bounds would be to prove he was lying about this subject.

Excuse me, edited to add, or that he was wrong in the accusation made. Edited by Jerry80871852
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

You know I think we probably agree 98% of the time but I just don't see that. That kind of thinking is one of the things that eventually can lead to pastors going astray. If they are only exposed to people that either say they are wonderful or horrible it can become a temptation to believe the people who say they are wonderful and ignore all criticism. I have seen pastors like that and I am sure you have too. If someone says they consider so and so to still be a good pastor but think they have a fault in a given area what is the great harm in that? We say and believe pastors are just men and fallible so what is the problem with publicly naming names and saying you think so and so is wrong in a given area? You may or may not agree on a particular issue but why is it necessary to sweep all disagreements under the rug and publicly pretend that there is no disagreement until things get so bad they explode?

This is not referring to this situation in particular as I do not and never have read the "sword of the Lord" nor do I really know that "crowd" and thus have no opinion one way or another. More of a general observation.


I see what you are saying....but I guess, to me, if we are truly "Independent" and therefore we answer to God and to our own church. Why should it matter to me where a pastor in California or Mississippi or Iowa preaches or where they do not preach? Now if they run a Bible College I can kind of see it because pastors send their kids there...but just an independent church...????? I just don't like it. And I don't think what he said was fair, because I personally know one of the pastors and feel he did NOT deserve what was said. This particular pastor is without question extremely separated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I should add I'm not a "Sword" follower.... but I do not think it concerns me what churches decide to be a part of their conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I should add I'm not a "Sword" follower.... but I do not think it concerns me what churches decide to be a part of their conference.


It may not concern you but it concerns us if our church is one of the offenders or is in partnership with one of the offending churches. We need to be very careful who we yoke with. I have seen many churches creep to the liberal side because of who they decided to start yoking with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It may not concern you but it concerns us if our church is one of the offenders or is in partnership with one of the offending churches. We need to be very careful who we yoke with. I have seen many churches creep to the liberal side because of who they decided to start yoking with.


So, honestly, because a certain pastor spoke at a Sword Conference, you would no longer have anything to do with that pastor or that church because of that?

If not...why, specifically?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

So, honestly, because a certain pastor spoke at a Sword Conference, you would no longer have anything to do with that pastor or that church because of that?

If not...why, specifically?


I would have to think about it. Sword Of The Lord does teach a wrong view of repentance and that is a serious matter. Also, if any of the speakers has CCM in their church we need to separate from them. Discernment is really lacking in many IFB churches and Cloud is a big help to educate IFB leaders. I am not say I always agree with Cloud but he fills a role that I don't see anyone else helping with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't know why this should be a problem. If the man is willing to speak there than that is a public thing and if cloud or anyone else does or doesn't like that they are free to say so. It is that pastors call about whether or not to preach there, it is clouds call about whether or not to condemn it, and anyone can make their own call about whether or not such a thing matters to them. No big deal.


Excellent. There are pastors that I would not let step behind my pulpit because of places they have preached & or been pastor of. A past friend, fellow pastor that I know quite well, or did know quite well, has been pastor of churches that hold to very questionable doctrine & practices. Because of that I would not have him in our church. Before he did theses things I would have had him.

In fact he, & another preacher, & I had a conversation about churches we would accept being pastor of before anyone of us 3 had been called. And he has done just what he said he would not do. It can be quite strange what a man will do when he is wanting to be a pastor of a church. Some times he will sacrifice truth in order to get a position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I would have to think about it. Sword Of The Lord does teach a wrong view of repentance and that is a serious matter. Also, if any of the speakers has CCM in their church we need to separate from them. Discernment is really lacking in many IFB churches and Cloud is a big help to educate IFB leaders. I am not say I always agree with Cloud but he fills a role that I don't see anyone else helping with.


I do not believe in easy believism or lack of repentance either. However if a pastor goes to the Sword Conference and preaches the CORRECT view of repentance or salvation...why would that be a bad thing? I think that is what the problem is here...if a man chooses to preach at the Sword Conference yet still maintains his integrity and his standards and his separation, then...????? Is it right that Cloud is discouraging churches from having this man in their pulpit?

I guess when it comes down to it, some here believe in secondary separation, and some do not. I have to say I don't necessarily believe in secondary separation. I do, if its extreme (for instance a pastor who were to preach in a Mormon church would be heretical and in that case, secondary separation is necessary) but I don't if its not extreme (for instance, if a pastor preaches in a church where the music is a little more contemporary than in that pastor's own church). In the first case, there is an obvious problem. In the second case, as long as the pastor himself and his own church is right, I don't see why its anybody's concern if he decides to preach in a church that may have a different music standard within the IFB circle (i.e. within reason...i.e. not talking rock concerts, here.). And I don't see a need to separate from the good pastor over that sort of thing.

The second example is, I feel, similar to what has happened in this particular article by David Cloud.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I would have to think about it. Sword Of The Lord does teach a wrong view of repentance and that is a serious matter. Also, if any of the speakers has CCM in their church we need to separate from them. Discernment is really lacking in many IFB churches and Cloud is a big help to educate IFB leaders. I am not say I always agree with Cloud but he fills a role that I don't see anyone else helping with.

It may not concern you but it concerns us if our church is one of the offenders or is in partnership with one of the offending churches. We need to be very careful who we yoke with. I have seen many churches creep to the liberal side because of who they decided to start yoking with.


It concerns me very much where a pastor has preached, or held the position of pastor, if he was to happen to preach in our church. In a previous post I stated a preacher that I knew quite well years ago had held the position of pastor in some very questionable churches, not knowing this I would have him, yet knowing it I would not allow him behind my pulpit.

I believe we are in an age, that many people firmly believes that you never to say one thing about a person unless its good. And If you can't say good about a person keep your mouth shut. Of course that comes from the liberals, for they want no one to warn anyone about them.

And of course, a person is not going to agree with anyone 100% of the time,
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I believe David Cloud is right in exposing anything by anyone that clearly does not line up with the Scriptures (ie. not referring to an area that is not spelled out clearly in the Bible); however, sometimes it seems some go too far with secondary separation. The Bible does not say separate from those preachers, etc. that do not separate from those who aren't separated. If a preacher is endorsing evil or personally involved in evil or compromise, they should be corrected/exposed - but if someone uses an opportunity to preach sound truth at a place that may be less than sound, that is between them and the Lord - as long as they are not personally involved in the compromise themselves or make it appear that they are endorsing all that goes on in that church, ministry, etc.

I admit sometimes it may be a fine line - but though the Scriptures do give us authority to expose evil, false teaching/teachers, sin, etc., I don't see where it gives us authority to blacklist a sound preacher who may have preached in a not so good place. What do we do with all those preachers and prophets in the Bible who preached where the Lord sent them, yet were places where evil was? Obviously God directed them to go there.

I had the opportunity to preach the Gospel at my Mom's memorial in a United Church - but I clearly preached the Gospel and the Saviour, and was rejected by my relatives afterwards. It was obvious to those there I did not agree with the teachings of the United Church and was in no way putting my stamp of approval on their church or religious beliefs.

Just some thoughts. Expose sin - but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!

Edited by Jerry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

We've got the Old Testament, & we have the New Testament, & we have instructions of the new Testament Churches. And the new Testament Churches have to be guarded. And in the Old Testament there was not a New Testament Church to guard. But Israel did not guard them self very good, & they let those in that cased them to sin against God.

So separation has been in place throughout all time, & many of us are not very good at it.

I read that article several days before this topic was posted on here, I believe someone stated, all that were named were not called out, just a few of them.

And of course, everyone is not going to agree with every call Mr. Cloud makes, even among IFB Churches.

I suppose you were the one who made me aware of Mr. Cloud. I'm not sure how long I've been receiving his articles. I've disagree with some of his calls, but never made a big deal out of it calling for him to stop as some do, or even calling him names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist



I would have to think about it. Sword Of The Lord does teach a wrong view of repentance and that is a serious matter. Also, if any of the speakers has CCM in their church we need to separate from them. Discernment is really lacking in many IFB churches and Cloud is a big help to educate IFB leaders. I am not say I always agree with Cloud but he fills a role that I don't see anyone else helping with.


I agreed with your reply. Based on this, then Cloud's warnings about Lancaster Baptist (thier music), if accurate, should make one avoid it, no?

If a church whose preaching is spot on(one up here in NE Ohio) but yet seems to promote Mr Chappell by displaying his books and preaching at his conferences annually, would you say by Mr Cloud's guideline/warnings, that we should avoid this church as well? From what I know about this church the preaching, doctrine and music is right, but should one be wary of them potentially falling away because of what appears to be a loose association with Lancaster/Chappell?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 7 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...