Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
      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."


      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:


      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.”


      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?


      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.

Plenty of Good IFB Churches, Men & Ministries

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


Just wanted to let everyone know that the Lord still has a lot of good, independent, fundamental, Baptist churches, men, and the ministries that God has given to these men, that are still going strong for the Lord Jesus. Most of these men, churches, and the ministries will not be recognized by any of the internet theologians, Reformed theologians, and disgruntled brethren trying to destroy good IFB churches, good IFB pastors and good IFB ministries of these men and their churches.

Throughout the history of the New Testament Church, starting at Jerusalem, these men, and their ministries, will not be listed in any of the 'church history' books written by any denominational scholar. The only men in any New Testament church listed by any denominational scholar mentioned or by a denominational 'church history' book, or an 'internet theologian,' will be one that has 'fallen' into disrepute. The denominational scholars, and internet theologians only use as their examples of non-denominational, New Testament, Baptist churches, men who disgraced the ministry, compromised, or fallen into sin. Denominational religious organizations  deliberately disregard non-denominational churches and those churches who stand for the faith and practice what they believe. A Protestant denomination does not want to recognize independent assemblies.

The men who have stayed faithful to the precepts of the New Testament church will be recognized, and honored, at the Judgment Seat of Christ. The purpose of my thread is to discuss what is an internet theologian and how they are undermining, or destroying, or causing to hinder, IFB churches.




Edited by Alan
doubled word & date & grammer (2) deleted the example changed the last sentence/purpose of the thread
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I understand the above statements and the concern. Thank you. I did not see any Calvinistic articles in the issue that I referred too. The reason for this thread is not to get in the debate about Calvinism. I think all of you know my doctrinal stance on Calvinism.

The stated reason why I started this thread was to show that there are IFB churches that are independent of a denominational hierarchy.  Maybe you missed this statement on their website; "Bethel Baptist Church is an independent, King James only, missions oriented church. We have and do maintain strict independence from any association, fellowship or group of any kind, but complete dependence upon God."

I guess I need to find better examples to bring out. Such is life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

Alan, I think the idea for your thread is great. That was never the question. Nor was any debate started about Calvinism. But when something is recommended, if there are Calvanist links folks need to know. I didn't miss the quote you pulled from their website. But neither did I miss where they very clearly said they believe in the doctrines of grace and in an effort to be quite clear, specified that they meant TULIP.

Again, the idea for the thread is great. We need the encouragement of knowing that there are folks out there standing fast. But, again, if there is something questionable in their belief system, it's only right and proper to warn folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


I decided to change the last sentence of the purpose of this thread as it seems that we will probably not fully agree on what a good IFB church totally believes in, an example of a good IFB church, and I do not want this thread to get into any disrespect of any IFB church whether on purpose or inadvertently.

On 7/15/2017 at 9:00 AM, Alan said:

The purpose of my thread is to discuss what is an internet theologian and how they are undermining, or destroying, or causing to hinder, IFB churches.

Premises, and Guidelines, for this thread

First, in order to go one step at a time in the premise of the thread, maybe we need to discuss what is an internet theologian? If possible (and that may be a big if), after we discuss, and maybe agree on a couple of points on what an internet theologian is, we can proceed on discussing how the internet theologian is undermining, or destroying, or causing to hinder, IFB churches.

I would like to qualify one word, the word, "destroy." In the context of this thread, the word "destroy" is taken from 2 Peter 2:2, "And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." The Noah Webster Dictionary of 1828 definition of 'pernicious' is: (1) Destructive; having the quality of killing, destroying or injuring; very injurious or mischievous. Food, drink, or air may be pernicious to life or health. (2) Destructive;  tending to injure or destroy. Evil examples are pernicious to morals. Intemperance is a pernicious vice."

Local Church: Independent, Fundamental and Baptist

In this thread, the meaning of pernicious can mean to destroy the effectiveness of the church, to cause disrespect to the pastor of an IFB church, to injure the testimony of an IFB church, to cause mischievousness within the IFB churches. These acts of destruction, in the context of 2 Peter 2 are: heresies taught to destroy the church, the truth of the scripture being evil spoken of within the church, self-willed, despising government (the context is the government, or order, of the church), speaking evil of dignities (in the context of 2 Peter 2 this is a reference to the church offices of the  church: pastor, deacons, and evangelists). I fully understand that 'dignities' can mean civil government authorities; in this thread we will take the meaning of the offices of the church as listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9 and Ephesians 4:11, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers." For the purpose of this thread, the  teachers are teachers in an local, Independent, Fundamental, Baptist church. For this thread, the 'teacher'  as referenced in Ephesians 4:11, does not include an individual teaching outside a local IFB church. I will not consider the 'Universal church' as biblical at all in this thread.

In this thread, 'presumptuous' and 'despising,' (2 Peter 2:10), the local IFB church, or pastor, will be applicable as meaning 'to destroy' the local IFB church or pastor. In this thread, the context of 2 Peter chapter 2 is 'false prophets,' and 'false teachers,' "among you." 2 Peter 2:1 "among you" in this thread is the internet theologian.



Edited by Alan
spelling & capitalization
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

With all due respect, and hoping that this does nothing to derail this thread, I would like to submit one thought for consideration.


My mind immediately goes to the fact that there were and are false prophets and teachers that have nothing to do with the Internet.

A person in any teaching or preaching capacity in a church can be a false teacher without any help from the Internet; may not even own a computer. So some may think of me as simply nitpicking, but I submitted this simply because the words "among you" were defined as Internet theologians.

Brother Alan did specify those two words as applying only to this thread, so perhaps I am just being nit picky in thinking beyond this thread and to IFB churches and the religious world in general.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think also, and somewhat related, is the fact that there are some who are Pastors of real churches who also have an internet presence. An example would be Steven Anderson, who has a small church that appears to concentrate on an internet ministry, but his teaching is largely false and very dangerous.

Edited by DaveW
Phone spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I understand both of the concerns and had previously thought about them.

I think there are good internet IFB sites and ministries. I know a lot of churches that have good sermon tapes, Bible Institutes on-line, and other resources, available for those who cannot attend the local assembly. A lot of the folks here on OnLine Baptist have excellent internet web pages and an internet ministry. I do not consider these ministries 'internet theologians.'

In this study, in order to narrow it down, due to the proliferation of individuals (mostly men), who leave an IFB on ill- terms and start their own ministry on the internet, usually a blog or a series of internet videos, in order to spread their heretical beliefs, their bitterness towards the pastor of their former IFB church, or to try and destroy the IFB community. The 'internet theologian' is a unique kind of heretical teacher and I wanted to define 2 Peter 2:1 "among you," in this study as an internet theologian. I fully understand that there are heretical teachers 'among you' in just about every local IFB church: even on the mission field. Those heretics are too many to mention in one study and I had to narrow it down.

As an example, due to the above parameters that I previously stated, in this study I would probably not include Pastor Steven Anderson. I think that Pastor Anderson's beliefs on repentance, the Second Coming of Christ for the Church, his sensationalism, his teaching on Israel, are erroneous. But, he is still the pastor of an IFB church, his church is local, KJV, and has a strong stance on other issues, and his internet ministry is part of his church.

So, even though Pastor Anderson fits the definition of a 'teacher' and "among you' he is the pastor of an IFB church, and his internet ministry is an intrinsic part of his church.

To my mind, an 'internet theologian' is an individual that has an internet ministry apart from an local IFB church, and is trying to destroy IFB churches, or doctrines that apply particularly to local IFB churches, or pastors, as a teacher, through his internet ministry.

I will give one example: Steve Sorenson, his blog is called, "Baptist Deception'" and here is the link to his site: http://www.baptistdeception.com/about/#.WXp-gnrhntR

This is an unusual study unique to our modern age and we need to know how to define the issue and deal with it properly. So, we will go slowly.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I do know of a couple of guys who don't have websites for that purpose (they have their own church websites, both being ex-IB Pastors), but they both do a lot of talking on social media like Faceplant.... sorry, Facebook, wherein they defame IB in general, and often specific men and churches.

A website can't be pointed to in such cases, but they are out there - the beauty of this for them, is that much of the stuff they write on those platforms passes off the front page fairly quickly, which means that they can say stuff and it has an initial effect, but then it is hard to call them on it later, because the comments become hard to find.

Kinda like the guy who yells abuse from his car window as he drives past - it hurts, but there is really nothing you can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Hmmm.... :think_smiley_50:I do not have a Facebook site (nor Twitter), so, I am not familiar with what goes on in the Facebook community.

And, it appears that some of the churches (sad to say), are using a church website in order to deceive folks that the church, and the ministry of the pastor, is accomplishing more than is actually happening. Apparently, there are church sites that are in reality internet church sites. If that be the case, than it may fit the description of an 'internet theologian."

One of the reasons why I feel that that the term 'internet theologian,' is appropriate is that these men are their own authority. They mis-use the scriptures (like other heretics), to teach their own interpretation of a pet doctrine, practice or disagreement with a previous pastor. They seem to disrespect pastors, IFB churches, and good sound biblical doctrine. Please, do not get me wrong, there is probably not a 'perfect' church in existence nor a 'perfect' pastor.  It seems that these internet theologians find one thing wrong in a church, or the pastor will not allow him to teach in the church, or the pastor preaches on some sin, and the individual becomes disgruntled, bitter, full of resentment, and goes on the internet to spew out his venom on an internet blog, forum, or video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't do Faceplant at all - but I know some who do, and they have regularly told of these two guys in particular, both of whom I have met in the past, one of whom I knew reasonably well in the past.

I did sign up to twitter many years ago, but I have no idea how to even view it let alone post to it..... :laugh:

In fact, the only thing even vaguely like that that I do use is ....ummm...... Linkedin - which I was signed up to a few years ago for work, but which I still keep track of - but that is all business stuff, not "social".




Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

In reading the various thoughts in this thread I can see that I have had a wrong understanding of the term "Internet Theologian" from the beginning. First I had never even heard the term until I found OB, it was here that I  heard it.

To my simple mind and not knowing any better, I thought an Internet Theologian was a "know it all", "always right" person, such as we have seen here at OB various times. These are the people that always seem to be at odds with correct IFB doctrine and all too willing to argue to the death to promote their false doctrine in message forums.

I just never thought of the term applying to various men and ministries that have a visible presence online. So here I get to learn something new. Although I may still, at times think of the term as applying to those who visit Internet forums with and agenda to disrupt unity and cause trouble among like minded brethren. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Jim Alaska,

I agree with everything that you said. When I first came on OnLine Baptist I thought, and still do think, that an internet theologian is a "know it all, "always right person." 2 Peter 2:10 says, "self-willed." These internet theologians despise IFB doctrine and will argue their erroneous teaching to the end of time; they are false teachers.

As you stated, and I agree, it seems now these false teachers are taking their nefarious ways a step further; they are creating their own websites, forums, blogs, etc..., in an effort to promote themselves and try to destroy every good pastor and church in the process.

One of the reasons why I am proceeding cautiously is that these internet theologians are spending hours each day promoting their teachings in forums, blogs, youtube videos that it is hard to keep abreast of what they are doing. Therefore, it is hard to sort through the mire of theological junk they are spewing out.

If you care to sift through the teachings  of Steve Sorenson (Sorenson is a false teacher, anti-KJV, Southern Baptist), you will find the same teachings and  false representations on Abraham and Melchizedek, and the issue of tithing, that SFIC, teaches.

These teachers are going from forum to forum teaching their pet beliefs and agendas. When you disagree with them, you are called Pharisaical, legalistic,  a cultist,  abusive, and a few other judgmental adjectives.

One thing that is common among them is that they are out to destroy traditional IFB beliefs, practices, and the local church by mis-representation, half-truths, using fallen men in the IFB ministry, etc...



Edited by Alan
grammer deleted disgruntled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I was in the process of giving detailed information on the Steve Sorenson site and showing how he, along with many other internet theologians, use false teachings, mis-use of scripture, innuendos, verbal accusations against IFB churches and pastors, the tithing issue, the KJV issue, the denominational issue, when I read his Copyright and Terms of Use (both under the 'About this Site), section. After reading the Copyright and Terms of Use notices concerning the usage of material on the site I decided, to protect myself legally, not to use any quotes or materials from his site. For those brethren who have the intestinal fortitude to stomach his accusations, falsehoods, verbal abuse, check out the site yourself and formulate your own opinion about what an 'internet theologian'  is and how they use false teachings in an attempt to destroy IFB churches and pastors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
17 hours ago, Alan said:

Jim Alaska,


If you care to sift through the teachings  of Steve Sorenson (Sorenson is a false teacher, anti-KJV, Southern Baptist), 



Not to be confused with David Sorenson (the following taken from the website of Northstar Baptist Church):

"Dr. David Sorenson

Pastor Emeritus

Pastor Sorenson retired as pastor after 27 years of service at Northstar Baptist Church. He is a nationally respected author and speaker on topics ranging from the King James Version of the Bible to marriage and family. His books include Touch Not the Unclean Thing, God's Perfect Book, and Training Your Children to Turn Out Right! Pastor Sorenson continues to serve in itinerant preaching and as a member of the church.
Pastor Sorenson has been married for over 40 years to his wife Pam, who is a native of Duluth. Together they have two daughters."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Old Fashioned Preacher,

Thank you for informing us about Dr. David Sorenson. Here is the website of Northstar Baptist Church where Dr. Sorenson pastored for 27 years.http://www.northstarbaptistchurch.com/about.html

Dr. Sorenson, Emeritus pastor from Northstar Baptist Church, is to me a good example of a fine church, and pastor, with an internet ministry.


This study on 'internet theologians,' is a study in the making. Previously, I had thought that if a church, even if they called themselves an IFB, that I would probably not call that individual an 'internet theologian.' As this study progresses I may have to change my thinking on this matter. After receiving a private e-mail letting me know that, apparently, many false teachers are just using a small congregation, or in reality, no congregation, or a loose fellowship, with no intention of building a church, of having an internet ministry to promote their false teachings. And, in reality, these false teachers are men who have left a good IFB church due to the pastor will not let them teach their erroneous teachings in the church, they become disgruntled, or bitter, towards the pastor, and just decide they can call their fellowhip of disgruntled saints a church. So, in reality their internet ministry is not just an extension of the church, or fellowship, but the main method of getting their false teachings into the public and churches, is through internet forums, blogs and video ministries.

Any thoughts? Shall we proceed in this direction?  Any examples?



Edited by Alan
added a phrase in the last sentence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 9 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Create New...