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.

What Books Are You Reading?


Recommended Posts

  • Members
19 hours ago, farouk said:

This book is based on Ephesians 6, I think... 🙂

I believe i is an exegesis of Ephesians 6...yes. I haven't had a chance to read much of it yet, but, I should be able to take more time this next few days. This is a newer "revision" of the copies of old. I've read them before, but that was long ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have a lot of books to read both hard copy and on Kindle but I'm just too lazy to read anymore it seems. I keep piling them up, though. The latest I bought is "The Fourth Turning" by Strauss and Howe. Interestingly, the "groundbreaking thesis" of the book is nothing new. Dr. Vance Havner came up with a similar thesis long before this book was written. 

Strauss and Howe had the decline of a nation as:

1) High 

2) Awakening 

3) Unraveling 

4) Crisis 

Havner applied the same cycle to a religious revival or church:

1) Man 

2) Movement 

3) Machine 

4) Monument 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 9/15/2021 at 10:08 AM, farouk said:

Hi @Musician4God1611 So what's the book like? I've heard of it, but haven't read it.

Prayer in Scripture can be a very absorbing and profitable thematic study.

It is an amazing book. He does a great job showing what is necessary for a Christian to take prayer seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Musician4God1611 said:

It is an amazing book. He does a great job showing what is necessary for a Christian to take prayer seriously.

Exhortations to prayer (and indeed to searching the Scriptures) are commendable...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
21 minutes ago, SureWord said:

If you can get a hold of Surgeon's "John Ploughman's Talks" I encourage it especially a vintage print.

I think I've thumbed through this book, but haven't READ it. I probably should. It was in my former pastor's study. He may still have it...I'll have to check. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
17 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Culturally Responsive Practices in Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences

Marlene B. Salas-Provance and Yvette D. Hyter

image.png.02fec6376003d061121ec3cab18daeb4.png

BB...just a question...do you EVER read anything Biblically related? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

BB...just a question...do you EVER read anything Biblically related? 

Sometimes. Not as much as when I was involved in the Lay Renewal Movement.  However, learning how people act and react across cultures can help in approaching others with Christ? Agree?

One quick example. Touching or rubbing the head of a child in our culture is acceptable, a sign of friendship. However, never touch the head of a Thai child. It is very insulting in their culture. 

Edited by Bouncing Bill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Back when we were discussing Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I downloaded The Cost Of Discipleship through the Scrib'd app and did start reading the first several chapters. Unlike in about 1996 when I originally read this book, I could not stomach the pro-Catholic monastic stance he takes in the early part of the book and therefore put the book on the shelf. In light of my desire for truth and to expose error, especially when it comes to error on how to be saved, it was always in the back of my mind to come back to this - but I have no desire to try to read more of that book.

So I tried doing a search tonight on Way Of Life Literature to see if they had any info on his beliefs - figuring that even if someone did not like the source of the article, if it mattered to them they could do due diligence and check out the quotes and page numbers - rather than getting mad at the person exposing the error, they could verify if what is stated in the article is in fact what Dietrich Bonhoeffer believed. This article does not specifically get into his works salvation which I had previously referred to, BUT it certainly is eye-opening to the rest of his beliefs (which I had never actually tried researching before - I had only ever read the one book of his, and was put off by it so never read anything else by him).

https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/dietrich_bonhoeffer.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 hours ago, Jerry said:

Back when we were discussing Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I downloaded The Cost Of Discipleship through the Scrib'd app and did start reading the first several chapters. Unlike in about 1996 when I originally read this book, I could not stomach the pro-Catholic monastic stance he takes in the early part of the book and therefore put the book on the shelf. In light of my desire for truth and to expose error, especially when it comes to error on how to be saved, it was always in the back of my mind to come back to this - but I have no desire to try to read more of that book.

So I tried doing a search tonight on Way Of Life Literature to see if they had any info on his beliefs - figuring that even if someone did not like the source of the article, if it mattered to them they could do due diligence and check out the quotes and page numbers - rather than getting mad at the person exposing the error, they could verify if what is stated in the article is in fact what Dietrich Bonhoeffer believed. This article does not specifically get into his works salvation which I had previously referred to, BUT it certainly is eye-opening to the rest of his beliefs (which I had never actually tried researching before - I had only ever read the one book of his, and was put off by it so never read anything else by him).

https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/dietrich_bonhoeffer.php

I don't agree with everything he teaches, but even those who don't hold specifically to all of the same beliefs/positions I hold can and often do have great, useable information! I don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, but many do. I'm not saying that this is what you're doing. I know that your reference back to Cloud's site and writings aren't something that I'm particularly fond of...him or his writings...but I will look on his site and read his writings if I'm wanting to research something. I don't have to like him or agree with him in all points to find things I do agree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

In this particular case, the article is mostly by someone else (another discernment ministry), introduced by Cloud.

In this case, the article gives quotes from his books that show that Bonhoeffer is not even saved, denying some of the fundamentals of the faith. So it is not a matter of personal preference and whether you glean something out of his writings or not - he is an unsaved heretic who should be warned again. Read him if you want, but God says this:

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Also:

1 John 4:1-3 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.

3 John 4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

A writer who will not embrace the truth and hold to it is not a source of spiritual food any true Christian should be partaking of - and that statement is consistent with God's Word. It is not a matter of personal preference. Someone is stepping on your toes because they questioned or critiqued a writer you like. Instead of getting upset or annoyed with the person doing so - IF YOU LOVE TRUTH AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST - you should be going to the Bible and comparing his writings to the Bible, and if there is any truth to what is being exposed about him and his doctrine, make the choice to embrace and hold to truth, not buck and kick because you don't like your idol being questioned. And yes, if you hold to any writer above the Word of God, then he has become an idol.

Prove the points in the article above wrong, then defend your writer - but if he does reject certain fundamentals of the faith and is a promoter or neo-orthodoxy, why are you holding on to a heretic?

Titus 3:10-11 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

We can't reject Bonhoeffer in person, but if what is posted in that article is what he actually believed, then you need to make a choice: the truth of the Word of God or Bonhoeffer.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I can certainly say he was unsaved based on his testimony found in his own writings - assuming they were not ripped out of context. There is no way in all of eternity - according to the Word of God - that he can be saved if he denied the virgin birth of Christ, His deity, His sinlessness, did not believe in the resurrection of Christ, believed in baptismal regeneration (for babies), denied a personal salvation and equated church membership with salvation, denied that Jesus Christ was the only way to God (ie. only way of salvation). That's a little different than having a different understanding of some Bible prophecy or having a different understanding or belief on a (minor, not fundamental doctrine) Bible difficulty. These are fundamentals of the faith and salvation - you cannot deny who Jesus is, His deity resurrection, etc. and still be trusting Him for salvation. There are reasons they are referred to as the FUNDAMENTALS of the faith - they are essential to salvation.

Granted, not everyone who comes to Christ understands all these things when they turn to Him for salvation - BUT no truly saved person will reject these fundamental doctrines when they learn of them from the Bible. If they do, they were never saved in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 minute ago, Jerry said:

I can certainly say he was unsaved based on his testimony found in his own writings - assuming they were not ripped out of context. There is no way in all of eternity - according to the Word of God - that he can be saved if he denied the virgin birth of Christ, His deity, His sinlessness, did not believe in the resurrection of Christ, believed in baptismal regeneration (for babies), denied a personal salvation and equated church membership with salvation, denied that Jesus Christ was the only way to God (ie. only way of salvation). That's a little different than having a different understanding of some Bible prophecy or having a different understanding or belief on a (minor, not fundamental doctrine) Bible difficulty. These are fundamentals of the faith and salvation - you cannot deny who Jesus is, His deity resurrection, etc. and still be trusting Him for salvation. There are reasons they are referred to as the FUNDAMENTALS of the faith - they are essential to salvation.

Granted, not everyone who comes to Christ understands all these things when they turn to Him for salvation - BUT no truly saved person will reject these fundamental doctrines when they learn of them from the Bible. If they do, they were never saved in the first place.

I've no proof that he did promote these things. In what I've read, he does have miscomprehension on some doctrines, but that doesn't equate to him not being saved. You're entitled to whatever you want to think...but by your own admission, you didn't read very much of him, so I'll take your opinion with a grain of salt!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

You're right - my personal opinion of his doctrines doesn't amount to much, which is why I asked you to verify if the above quotes were true or not. If they were not taken out of context, then they show the beliefs of an unsaved man. My position on gauging someone's salvation/doctrines/testimony by the Word of God is not opinion. The Bible is supposed to be our rule, our gauge, our canon, our guide, for all our practices and doctrines. If something or someone does not line up with the Word of God, they are wrong - regardless of whether you like them or not.

For the sake of the argument, if he truly waffled that much on his doctrine and was that unclear, how can anyone be spiritually benefitted by his writings - unless they want religious sentiment without truth. But that is the essence of neo-orthodoxy (and now emergent church writers) - question everything, don't go to the Bible for answers, but question the Bible, then water down everything so we can all be united.

If you can't be bothered to check out the actual quotes above that give actual page numbers of his stated beliefs and positions, why are you defending him? Because you don't like someone drawing a line and saying we should not cross that line if we love God's Word? Prove the statements wrong, and that ends all debate. This is not a hill I would die on (ie. Bonhoeffer specifically - yes to defending the truth, no to an individual writer).

You are 100% right to read whatever you want - eat poison all day if you like - but don't get upset or buck and kick because others warn against that poison. God's Word says a diet of false teachings, heretics, and learning from the ungodly WILL affect His people negatively. That is why I am warning against things like this.

Proverbs 19:27 Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.

Ouch! That's just my opinion. Actually, that's God's Word.

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Psalm 1:1-2 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

Someone that rejects the fundamentals of the faith and still gives spiritual teachings/writings to others fits at least two of the three things mentioned above (I would say all three, because if they denied the fundamentals of the faith it also still makes them a sinner).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 minute ago, Jerry said:

You're right - my personal opinion of his doctrines doesn't amount to much, which is why I asked you to verify if the above quotes were true or not. If they were not taken out of context, then they show the beliefs of an unsaved man. My position on gauging someone's salvation/doctrines/testimony by the Word of God is not opinion. The Bible is supposed to be our rule, our gauge, our canon, our guide, for all our practices and doctrines. If something or someone does not line up with the Word of God, they are wrong - regardless of whether you like them or not.

For the sake of the argument, if he truly waffled that much on his doctrine and was that unclear, how can anyone be spiritually benefitted by his writings - unless they want religious sentiment without truth. But that is the essence of neo-orthodoxy (and now emergent church writers) - question everything, don't go to the Bible for answers, but question the Bible, then water down everything so we can all be united.

If you can't be bothered to check out the actual quotes above that give actual page numbers of his stated beliefs and positions, why are you defending him? Because you don't like someone drawing a line and saying we should not cross that line if we love God's Word? Prove the statements wrong, and that ends all debate. This is not a hill I would die on (ie. Bonhoeffer specifically - yes to defending the truth, no to an individual writer).

You are 100% right to read whatever you want - eat poison all day if you like - but don't get upset or buck and kick because others warn against that poison. God's Word says a diet of false teachings, heretics, and learning from the ungodly WILL affect His people negatively. That is why I am warning against things like this.

Proverbs 19:27 Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.

Ouch! That's just my opinion. Actually, that's God's Word.

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Psalm 1:1-2 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

Someone that rejects the fundamentals of the faith and still gives spiritual teachings/writings to others fits at least two of the three things mentioned above (I would say all three, because if they denied the fundamentals of the faith it also still makes them a sinner).

As I've stated, I've read limited amounts of his writings...and most of that by assignment. What I've read doesn't equate to him not being saved. The attitude you're perveying here is one reason my wife and I left the IFB movement..a constant, "They're not saved" coming out of someone's mouth or in THEIR writings because they didn't agree with what was said. Nobody holds a perfect view or interpretation of Scripture, though we all should strive to have one. And as stated, I won't judge your salvation by the writer, nor will I judge his salvation by your opinion until I have read more of his works...and even then, I probably won't doubt his salvation...that's not my job...I'm told to preach the kingdom and defend the faith. So far, in my readings, I've found nothing that is terribly off-base with him. I'll let you know, though. I have more doubt of a man's salvation when he can't admit he's wrong and correct errors he's made (CLOUD)...doesn't seem very Godly to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 8 Guests (See full list)

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