Bro.Cloud on Southern Baptist Theological Seminary & New Evangelicalism

Discussion in 'Baptist Colleges / Seminaries' started by Gregory Perry Sr., Nov 7, 2005.

  1. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Dec 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    This is a cut and paste of Bro.Clouds article....what is your opinions of it.My Pastor and I are curious what everybody may think on this subject.We are SBC.
    Here's the article as follows:

    October 11, 2005 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information
    Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143,
    [email protected]; for instructions about subscribing and
    unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at
    the end of the article) -

    On August 15, 2005, I visited the campus of Boyce College and
    Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, and
    spent about three hours walking around the campus, talking with
    students, and examining the bookstore and the classroom textbooks.
    This is the foremost seminary operated by the Southern Baptist
    Convention, and though it is no longer the openly liberal institution
    that it was in past decades, it remains New Evangelical to the core.


    A hallmark of New Evangelicalism from its inception in the 1940s is a
    repudiation of separatism. Billy Graham's "inclusive evangelism"
    epitomizes this unscriptural and spiritually dangerous philosophy.
    Graham has focused on "the positive proclamation of truth" without a
    complementary negation of error that is required by Scripture and he
    has completely repudiated doctrinal separation.

    It was Harold Ockenga who claimed to have coined the term
    "Neo-evangelicalism." Notice how he defined it: "Neo-evangelicalism
    was born in 1948 in connection with a convocation address which I
    gave in the Civic Auditorium in Pasadena. ... The ringing call for A
    received a hearty response from many evangelicals. ... We had no
    intention of launching a movement, but found that the emphasis
    attracted widespread support and exercised great influence.
    Neo-evangelicalism ... was DIFFERENT FROM FUNDAMENTALISM IN ITS
    REPUDIATION OF SEPARATISM and its determination to engage itself in
    the theological dialogue of the day" (Harold J. Ockenga, foreword to
    Harold Lindsell's book The Battle for the Bible).

    The Southern Baptist Convention today, even in its most conservative
    side, still repudiates fundamentalism and renounces separatism in the
    clearest fashion.

    Last year, Morris Chapman, president of the SBC Executive Committee,
    warned against "separatism." In his June 2004 message "The
    Fundamentals of Cooperating Conservatives," he said:

    "There's a road wrongly taken by many on our left, the road of
    liberalism. But there is also a road wrongly taken by many others on
    our right side. It may not be as treacherous as the road of
    liberalism, but it is just as disabling to the Convention. What is
    this road? It is the road of separatism--an ecclesiastical
    methodology that devalues cooperation in favor of hyper independence.
    In the past, we have avoided this road as fervently as the road on
    the left. If Southern Baptists steer too sharply toward the right, we
    will end up on the road of separatism. SOUTHERN BAPTISTS HAVE NEVER

    Chapman admitted precisely what we are warning about, that the
    Southern Baptist Convention is New Evangelical to the core and has
    renounced biblical separation.

    The professors at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary are required
    to sign a strict statement of faith that includes a statement on the
    infallible inspiration of Scripture, but they are not required to
    separate from liberalism. Verses such as Romans 16:17; 2 Cor. 6:14;
    and 2 Tim. 3:5 are ignored. Many of the professors are members of
    liberal and ecumenical organizations such as the Evangelical
    Theological Society (which allows its member to hold damnable errors
    such as Open Theism, which denies the foreknowledge and omniscience
    of God, claiming that He does not know the future perfectly) and the
    extremely liberal Society of Biblical Literature. Southern professors
    routinely speak at ecumenical forums and at theologically liberal
    colleges and universities. Rather than plainly renouncing false
    teachers as heretics and evil men after the fashion of the apostles
    (e.g., Acts 13:10; 2 Cor. 11:13-15; 1 Tim. 4:1-4; 2 Tim. 2:16-18;
    3:13; 2 Pet. 2:1-2; Jude 4; 1 John 2:18-19) and separating from them
    in a biblical sense (e.g., Rom. 16:17; 2 Cor. 6:14; 2 Tim. 2:16; 3:5;
    Titus 3:10-11), they desire to remain in friendly dialogue with them.

    Consider Joel F. Drinkard, Jr., Professor of Old Testament
    Interpretation. He is an Associate Editor of the Mercer Dictionary of
    the Bible (General Editor Watson E. Mills, Assoc. Editors Roger
    Bullard, Joel Drinkard, Walter Harrelson, Edgar McKnight; Assistant
    Editors, Rollin Armour, Edmon Rowell Jr., Richard Wilson. Mercer
    University Press, 1991, August 1997 printing).

    Mercer University, the publisher of this dictionary, is a thoroughly
    liberal institution. R. Kirby Godsey, who has been at the helm of
    this Southern Baptist-associated school for 26 years, denies,
    reinterprets, or questions practically every doctrine of the
    Christian faith. (See "Liberal SBC University President Godsey
    Considering Retiring," Fundamental Baptist Information Service, March
    1, 2004). In his book When We Talk about God ... Let's Be Honest
    (Smyth & Helwys, 1996) Godsey claims that "the notion that God is the
    all powerful, the high and mighty principal of heaven and earth
    should be laid aside." That is wicked heresy of the highest degree
    and a true Bible believer should have no part whatsoever with such a
    wicked institution.

    Note the following blatant theologically liberal statements found in
    the Mercer Dictionary of the Bible:

    Moses -- "Yet, this central position in Israelite history and
    tradition dos not mean that the historical Moses is near. The advent
    of modern biblical scholarship--which has recognized that the
    biblical material is not strictly history, biography or
    autobiography, but an inspired, creative, and interpretative
    combination of traditions--has spawned the quests for the people who
    figured prominently in the biblical story. As a result, the
    historical Moses proves as elusive as the historical Jesus."

    Babel - "As with the other stories found in Gen 1-11, the historical
    character of the Babel narrative is the subject of frequent debate.
    Many scholars believe the story is mythological. However, to dwell
    upon the historicity issue is to miss the point of the author. One
    should ask instead why the story is included in the Bible. What does
    the author want to say?"

    Southern Baptist Theological Seminary tells us that they do not agree
    with these liberal statements or with the heresies promoted at Mercer
    University, but they allow their professors to join hands in the most
    intimate fellowship with such institutions and even co-author books
    with those who do hold these damnable views (see 2 Pet. 2:1,
    "damnable heresies").

    The Southern Baptist Convention's own state colleges and universities
    are filled with theological modernism, and there is no plain
    separation on the part of the national seminaries from the SBC state
    institutions. By the very nature of the denominational system, such
    separation could not be practiced. One is required to come out of the
    biblically compromised denominational system in order to be fully
    obedient to God's Word.


    Rock & Roll Christianity is evident on every hand at Southern
    Seminary, by the manner of dress (though it is more modest than at
    most SBC colleges and universities) and by the wide variety of
    Contemporary Christian Music for sale in the bookstore. Rock & Roll
    Christianity within the student body at Southern Seminary is merely a
    reflection of the Southern Baptist congregations that the students
    represent. Not one in 100 of these congregations preach plainly
    against social evils such as rock & roll and country-western and rap
    music and ungodly Hollywood movies and television programs; not one
    in 100 maintain a modest dress standard for church workers or warn
    parents against such spiritual dangers as the state-operated public
    school system; not one in 100 require clear evidence of repentance of
    potential church members or practice church discipline; not one in
    100 preach against the Rick Warren style church growth methods that
    lower the standards of the church to accommodate the unsaved. (Rick
    Warren's unscriptural Church Growth principles are proudly on display
    at Southern Seminary through the prominent display of his materials
    in the bookstore and their use in the classroom, and no warning
    whatsoever is given to students or visitors who purchase his


    Southern Seminary proudly hosts the Billy Graham School of Missions
    Evangelism and Church Growth. The school thus gives its full
    endorsement to the unscriptural and extremely dangerous Billy Graham
    ecumenical evangelism. Southern Seminary has a course entitled
    Christian Life and Witness, which trains students in crusade
    counseling techniques. On May 3, 2001, the Baptist Press ran an
    article entitled "Hundreds of Southern Students Prepare for Graham
    Crusade." R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of Southern Seminary,
    served as the chairman of Graham's crusade. He told the Baptist
    Press, "Nothing else has brought together the kind of ethnic and
    racial and DENOMINATIONAL INCLUSIVITY as is represented in this
    crusade; nothing in my experience and nothing in the recent history
    of Louisville has brought together such a group of committed
    Christians for one purpose" [emphasis added].

    We would ask Mohler why he doesn't sound a warning about the fact
    that Billy Graham has turned thousands of seekers over to Roman
    Catholic and liberal Protestant churches or the fact that Billy
    Graham has exalted Roman Popes as a genuine Christians even though
    they are wholly committed to a false gospel, to name only two of the
    serious errors of this popular ministry?

    Dr. Graham has sent multiplied thousands of converts back to Roman
    Catholic and modernistic Protestant churches to be devoured by wolves
    in sheep's clothing (see Christ's warning in Matthew 7:15-20). We
    have carefully and extensively documented this in our book
    Evangelicals and Rome. Here are three examples of Graham's practice:

    1984 - Vancouver, British Columbia crusade vice-chairman David Cline
    stated: "If Catholics step forward there will be no attempt to
    convert them and their names will be given to the Catholic church
    nearest their homes" (Vancouver Sun, Oct. 5, 1984).

    1987 - A priest and a nun were among the supervisors of the
    counselors for the Denver crusade; from one service alone 500 cards
    of individuals were referred to St. Thomas More Roman Catholic Church
    (Wilson Ewin, Evangelism: The Trojan Horse of the 1990's).

    1989 - 2,100 Catholics that came forward during Graham's London
    crusade were referred to Catholic churches (John Ashbrook, New
    Neutralism II: Exposing the Gray of Compromise, 1992).

    If turning seekers over to Roman Catholic and modernistic churches is
    not cause for alarm by those who claim to be evangelical Bible
    believers, nothing is.

    By honoring Billy Graham as it has, Southern Baptist Theological
    Seminary is a partaker in his evil deeds in ignoring the importance
    of Bible doctrine as the sole authority for faith and practice (1
    Tim. 1:3) and as the standard for separation (Rom. 16:17) and in
    breaking down the walls of biblical separation between true and false

    It is impossible in this day and time to have "denominational
    inclusivity" without compromising and disobeying the Word of God. Has
    God not commanded that we not allow "any other doctrine" (1 Tim.
    1:3)? It is impossible to be that strict about doctrine and at the
    same time to practice any sort of denominational inclusivity after
    the fashion of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Organization.

    Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's honor toward Graham is proof
    positive of its New Evangelical stance. Southern Seminary honors
    Billy Graham because it is likeminded with him and follows the same
    compromising New Evangelical philosophy. "Can two walk together,
    except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3).


    Southern Seminary's New Evangelicalism is also evident in that its
    bookstore contains many books by theological heretics and there is no
    warning given anywhere. The New Evangelical will claim that he does
    not agree with heresies taught by men such as C.S. Lewis or F.F.
    Bruce or Kurt Aland or Bruce Metzger, but he also will not plainly
    renounce such men or separate plainly from them. The New Evangelical
    will quote freely and non-critically from heretics without warning
    his readers or hearers that such men are not theologically and
    spiritually safe.

    Consider C.S. Lewis, for example. Many of his books are on sale at
    Southern Seminary's bookstore. D. Martin Lloyd-Jones warned that C.S.
    Lewis had a defective view of salvation and was an opponent of the
    substitutionary and penal view of the atonement (Christianity Today,
    Dec. 20, 1963). That type of heresy is not peripheral but strikes at
    the very heart of biblical Christianity. Lewis believed in theistic
    evolution and taught that hell is a state of mind. In a letter to the
    editor of Christianity Today, Feb. 28, 1964, Dr. W. Wesley Shrader,
    First Baptist Church, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, warned that "C.S.
    Lewis would never embrace the (literal-infallible) view of the Bible."

    Consider also the writings of F.F. Bruce, which are for sale in the
    Southern Seminary bookstore. A reviewer of Bruce's book Paul: Apostle
    of the Heart Set Free (which was on sale at Southern Seminary's
    bookstore) observed: "There is a noticeable lack of any detailed
    consideration of such doctrines as the atonement, election, scripture
    and apostolic authority. He presents Paul's teaching as the
    developing thought of an apostle, formed out of his exceptional
    experience of Christ, rather than as the inspired truth of God.
    Whilst for the most part reaching conservative conclusions, he
    appears to proceed on largely liberal assumptions" (John Wenham,
    Autobiography, pp. 195-6; cited by Iain Murray, Evangelicalism
    Divided, p. 181). A popular commentary series edited by F.F. Bruce
    and William Barclay is full of modernistic error and
    historical-critical mumbo-jumbo. In the volume dealing with Daniel
    and Revelation, Bruce and Barclay claim the book of Daniel was
    written AFTER the fulfillment of the events prophesied therein. In
    the same volume, we are told that we cannot know who authored the
    book of Daniel (though Jesus Christ said Daniel wrote it). The volume
    on 1 and 2 Timothy claims that an unknown author wrote these letters
    in Paul's name. The volume on Isaiah claims there were three authors
    of Isaiah. The Lord Jesus Christ quoted from both major sections of
    Isaiah and attributed the entire book to the ONE historical prophet,
    but the commentary series edited by Bruce and Barclay make Christ a
    liar by claiming there were three Isaiahs!

    Consider the writings of Kurt Aland, which are for sale in the
    Southern Seminary bookstore. Aland, a prominent textual critic who
    died in 1994, rejected verbal inspiration. "This idea of verbal
    inspiration (i.e., of the literal and inerrant inspiration of the
    text), which the orthodoxy of both Protestant traditions maintained
    so vigorously, was applied to the Textus Receptus with all of its
    errors, including textual modifications of an obviously secondary
    character (as we recognize them today)" (Aland, The Problem of the
    New Testament Canon, 1962, pp. 6, 7). As a contributor (with Allen
    Wikgren, Bruce Metzger, and Matthew Black, Aland's fellow editors of
    the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament) to the 1982 revised
    edition of Peake's Commentary, Aland put his stamp of approval upon
    its modernistic theology, which claimed, for example, that the Old
    Testament contains myths and the Gospels were the product of
    uncertain naturalistic processes. Aland even taught that the canon of
    Scripture is yet unsettled.

    Consider also the writings of Bruce Metzger, which are prominently on
    sale in the Southern Seminary bookstore. At least three of Metzger's
    books were on sale, The Text of the New Testament, The Canon of the
    New Testament, and Breaking the Code: Understanding the Book of
    Revelation (something which Metzger is not guilty of!). The school
    also uses the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, which is
    edited by Bruce Metzger, Kurt Aland, and other theological liberals.
    Metzger, one of the most influential textual critics alive today, is
    a radical ecumenist who has met with Roman Popes at least three
    times. Metzger's radical modernism in relation to the Scripture is
    evident in the notes to the New Oxford Annotated Bible RSV, which he
    co-edited with Herbert May. It first appeared in 1962 as the Oxford
    Annotated Bible and was the first Protestant annotated edition of the
    Bible to be approved by the Roman Catholic Church. It was given an
    imprimatur in 1966 by Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston. In this
    volume, Metzger and May claim the Old Testament contains "a matrix of
    myth, legend, and history," deny the worldwide flood, call Job an
    "ancient folktale," claim there are two authors of Isaiah, call Jonah
    a "popular legend," and otherwise wickedly attack the divine
    inspiration of Holy Scripture contrary to the example of the Lord
    Jesus Christ and His apostles.


    The Bible gives unequivocal warnings about affiliating with error:

    "Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven
    leaveneth the whole lump?" (1 Cor. 5:6).

    "Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners" (1 Cor. 15:33).

    Dr. Charles Woodbridge was a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary
    in its early days, a founding member of the National Association of
    Evangelicals, and an associate of men such as Harold Ockenga and Carl
    Henry, but he rejected the New Evangelical philosophy and spent the
    rest of his life warning of its dangers. He made the following
    important observation:

    "The New Evangelicalism advocates TOLERATION of error. It is
    following the downward path of ACCOMMODATION to error, COOPERATION
    with error, CONTAMINATION by error, and ultimate CAPITULATION to
    error!" (Charles Woodbridge, The New Evangelicalism, 1969, pp. 9, 15).

    May the Lord grant an ear to heed this wise warning!

    (For a more extensive study of the history, doctrine, influence, and
    fruit of New Evangelicalism see "Fundamentalism, Modernism, and New
    Evangelicalism" at the Way of Life Literature web site --
  2. untangled

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Jun 28, 2002
    Likes Received:

    I'm SBC myself as well (conservative). I'm actually quite amused. The author is nothing but hateful it seems. I noticed the wayoflife email address so it has to be the same guy I'm thinking of.

    One, I wouldn't trust his words because when he went to SBTS he already had his mind made up because it was SBC. Its common sense. If he calls the SBC heretical (I can find a quote if anyone is wondering what he has said of the SBC) then goes to the schools which I believe was just to write hateful about it, then nobody should trust him. It doesn't matter if anything he says as any truth in it. Even if he would have walked in a SB church that was exactly like his to the names of the deacons he would have still hated it.

    Maybe this article may have a couple things right but there is a little warning he needs to read as well.

    Matthew 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees

    I'm all for seperation when it is warranted. Not everyone with a Bible is my brother or sister.

    I personally have never been to SBTS. However, I would never take the words in this article because of where it comes from.

    I usually don't give the wayoflife material my time because to be honest I sort of take offense because I am SB.

    In Christ,

  3. Rhetorician

    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Feb 1, 2005
    Likes Received:

    I am a Southern alum. I "second that emotion." I think the article and the attitude behind the article stand for themselves.


  4. Broadus

    Expand Collapse

    Nov 30, 2004
    Likes Received:
    This is typical of David Cloud's misinformation to "prove" what he had already determined. Honestly, it's not worth my time to counter his lunacy point by point.

    He uses one old professor of the pre-Mohler era and that prof's writing for the Mercer Dictionary as evidence of Southern's heterodoxy. I can assure you that the prof referenced does not represent the faculty.

    He cites books in the bookstore (yikes!) as further evidence. How stupid. Southern students read widely and, unlike Cloud, with discernment.

    My perspective is doubtlessly unique to the BB. I have a degree from Hyles-Anderson and degrees from SBTS. I know about Cloud's camp and the SBC, and, while neither SBTS nor the SBC are without warts (aren't they comprised of humans?), Cloud is certainly wrong in his allegations. SBTS is solidly conservative in its theology and is worthy as an institution of higher education.

    I realize I have written with bluntness, but I get tired of unsubstantiated and distorted charges from folks who simply "cloud" the issues. I wonder if Cloud isn't a bit concerned about the independent Baptist students who go to SBTS to further their education. I've met quite a number.

  5. All about Grace

    All about Grace
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Feb 11, 2002
    Likes Received:
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]


    The above Graemlins represent Cloud's credibility.
  6. Rhetorician

    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Feb 1, 2005
    Likes Received:
    To all who will read this:

    I say a hearty "AMEN" to what Broadus has said above.

    I too am a Southern grad with a unique point of view. I was reared in an SBC church with a Bob Jones pastor (go figure!). I also have a degree from Mid America BTS. So, I am well acquainted with all of the arguments as well as attitudes of the Independent Baptists.

    For anyone to say that The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is "liberal" or "not-separated" misses the main issue. The main issue is: Do they have a God honoring & Christ exalting Gospel that glorifies God; and not some mini-Pope, independent minded, individual.

    My $ is still on Southern Seminary and what it stands for--the Gospel. If you want to see the proof of the pudding, then do some eating! Look at the caliber of the Sothern alums and what they are doing in the church and the world.

    But some IFBers could not see that for looking at secondary issues promoted by factious (sp?) leaders. Some of this stuff sounds like Corinthians all over again!

    I am like Broadus now, don't mean to be sharp, cutty, or snide; but those who major on minors really do need to look at themselves. And b/b you say it, I do look at myself constantly and perpertually.


  7. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Dec 30, 2003
    Likes Received:
    I agree with you guys. I think "Cloud",the name says it all.
  8. preachinjesus

    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Feb 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    secondary separation isn't a biblical fundamental...simply a theological preference

    we can do more together than apart
  9. Johnv

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Oct 24, 2001
    Likes Received:
    David Cloud is just a wolf in Chick's clothing. Why would anyone waste good brain matter on his tripe?
  10. Humblesmith

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Mar 11, 2005
    Likes Received:
    I call it a good sign that so many here disagree with the reasoning in the posted article. Too many times in past generations Christians were measured by appearances, not by substance.

    I'm as motivated as anyone to set a clear separation from sin and the worst parts of liberalism, but we can't make the mistake of going too far the other way. It's a good sign that people here recognize that.

    Legalism is a greater threat in our circles than license.
  11. Paul33

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Sep 18, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Cloud wants us to remain isolationists and not engage our culture.

    I don't have to agree with every doctrinal point my brother in Christ makes. I do want him to confess that Jesus is Lord and believe in his heart that God raised him from the dead. I also want to know that he is trusting in the LORD for salvation and committed his life to Christ.

    With that knowledge, I'm ready to work with others for the kingdom of God.

    It's sad that someone would castigate Southern under the leadership of Al Moehler. It shows how divisive some "fundamentalists" are.

    Since Cloud wants us to apply Scripture, I'm sure that we would all agree that we must "mark" him as a divisive person, "warn" him twice, and then have nothing to do with him!
  12. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Dec 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    While I know that much of what Bro.Cloud has to say is controversial,I find that not too many people (including some here on the B.B.) will go toe to toe with him on a debate. After reading the above responses I find that most of you simply object to what he has to say simply because he doesn't support the SBC.I haven't noticed anyone refuting his assertions in regards to the seminaries apparent New Evangelical leanings nor their endorsement or support of Dr.Graham inspite of his well-documented compromises. I'm NOT saying I agree with everything Bro.Cloud says or does but I have been blessed and informed by much of what he writes and reports on.ANY critique of the article quoted above should be centered on the charges and assertions he makes in order to be fair and balanced.Remember....I go to an SBC church right now although my background was IFB in years past.I believe I am where the Lord wants me at this time in my life but I try to be objective in what I believe and what I do.Would anyone like to REFUTE what Cloud says about SBTS based on facts....and not sentiments?Is Cloud lying about the things he said about SBTS? That's what I wanted to know......I'm trying to stay objective......and faithful to the Lord(that's MOST important)...thanks.

    Greg Perry Sr.
  13. atestring

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    May 3, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Who would refer to David cloud as Brother Cloud?
    He is nobodies brother!
    He thinks that everyone in the world ( except himself) is wrong and heretical.
    He is just a busy Body internet bum that is full of beans!
    He has nothing better to do than try to make himself look good by putting down everyone else>

    How dare he be referred to as Brother. To do invalidates the term brother.
  14. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Dec 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Paul33....engaging our culture is one thing....we should carry the pure Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ out into this lost world.....but CAVING IN to it,inviting it in and letting it dominate our churches and our "worship" is quite another.We'll never "win" this world by becoming more like it.We won't purify will pollute US.

    Greg Perry Sr.
  15. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Dec 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    atestring....I hardly think you are qualified to judge whether Bro.Cloud is or isn't saved.He gives a clear testimony of trusting Christ as his personal Saviour as well as years as a preacher of the Gospel and a teacher of sound Biblical Doctrine.That's good enough for me to gladly call him Brother.Methinks you have let your anti-Cloud bias control your typing fingers.I'll pray for you brother.

    Greg Perry Sr.
  16. atestring

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    May 3, 2001
    Likes Received:
    You bet i have an anticloud bias.
    I hope you are laughing when you say he is a teacher of sound Biblical doctrine. i certainly am laughing..
    I don't think he has time to discuss sound Biblical Doctrine he is to busy staying on the internet slamming everyone except anyone that pronounces "shiboleth " the way he pronounces it.
  17. Paul33

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Sep 18, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Agreed. But to suggest that SBTS and/or Al Moehler are compromising the gospel is ludicrous. SBTS under Al Moehler's leadership is at the forefront of evangelism and defending the faith once for all delivered to the saints.

    An attack on them as "new evangelicals" is misguided at best.
  18. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Dec 9, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Atestring...still...the point was you shouldn't judge the guys salvation...he IS a brother in Christ whether you wish to think so or not.As to his teaching of sound doctrine,I am a subscriber to FBIS and have spent a good bit of time looking through his website, .There is much good info and strong teaching on there.I try to be objective and as such I don't agree 100% with ANYBODY (except the much as I know to do so).David Cloud has a ministry that exists to warn and inform Bible Believers about the issues of our day,truth,and error as he sees it.It isn't perfect...but it isn't bad either.If he says something you don't like...that's ok.That's just the way it is.

    Greg Sr.
  19. DavidFWhite3

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Aug 7, 2001
    Likes Received:
    It has been so nice to be away from all this. See you folks in another six months or so to see if you have found anything worthwhile to discuss.

  20. TomVols

    Expand Collapse

    Oct 30, 2000
    Likes Received:
    Typical drivel from someone who does not love the truth.

Share This Page