Kirk Franklin Summarizes the CCM Philosophy

October 8, 2015 (first published June 26, 2013) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143,

Kirk Franklin
Kirk Franklin, one of the biggest names in Contemporary Christian Music, recently summarized the CCM philosophy in a radio interview with DJ Sway Calloway. To the question “How do you feel about same sex marriage?” Franklin replied:

“Whatever my lens is, it’s always going to be trying my best to see something through what I believe is going to be God's word, and not God's word in the essence of dogma or in the essence of religion, or to be right and to make other people wrong. I first would probably always want to say I'm very sorry for all of the ugly and all of the painful things that people have even heard from church people, because things can come from a very homophobic lens. ... I always want to stand on in the Book of Romans. It says (in chapter three), ‘For there is none righteous, (no) not one.’ ... God sees us all as broken people that need His love and His grace. ... Jesus died for our sins. So if we're all sinners, that means everybody’s in the pot together needing the same love, the same grace and the same forgiveness” (Kirk Franklin, “Sway in the Morning,” cited from
Christian Post, June 4, 2013).

By analyzing this statement in light of Scripture we will learn a lot about the CCM philosophy, and it is the CCM philosophy that is destroying the Biblical character of individuals, families, and churches that are unwisely building bridges to it by messing around with contemporary worship.

First, Franklin’s view of “God’s word” is that it is not dogmatic and doesn’t present one right way, which means He has a grossly heretical view of Holy Scripture. In contrast to Franklin’s view, Jesus continually cited Scripture as dogma, including on the marriage issue.

“The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made
them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:3-6).

Jesus said that marriage is for one man and one woman. Period. That means it isn’t for one man and two women, or two men and one woman, or a woman and a woman, or a man and a man, etc. Jesus was dogmatic on everything and cited Scripture as absolute authority, but large numbers of people within the CCM crowd don’t know this Jesus. They worship the cool, non-dogmatic Jesus of “The Shack.”

continue reading this article..

What Rights Will Others Lose When Homosexuals Gain Their Rights?

Enlarged October 7, 2015 (first published August 5, 2008) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143,

If homosexual activists are given every right they demand, citizens in Western nations will be robbed of many liberties they have heretofore enjoyed. This is not a guess; it is a judgment based on current facts. The rights to free speech and to the free exercise of religion, in particular, will be effectively destroyed.


In 1997 Jo Ann Knight was fired by the Connecticut Department of Public Health after she counseled a homosexual couple from the Bible about salvation and about the necessity of repenting of sin. Knight’s job was to supervise the provision of medical services by Medicare agencies to home health care patients, and in that capacity she interviewed patients. The homosexuals filed a complaint with the Commission on Human Rights. A district court upheld Knight’s dismissal, claiming that her religious speech caused her clients distress and interfered with the performance of her duties.

In 2000 Evelyn Bodett was fired by CoxCom Cable for expressing her biblical views against homosexuality to a lesbian subordinate. They claimed that she was thereby “coercing and harassing” the lesbian contrary to company policy. The lesbian, Kelley Carson, had sought Bodett’s advice in regard to a recent breakup with her homosexual partner, and Bodett gave her biblical counsel that homosexuality is a sin. Carson complained about the matter to a supervisor. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Bodett’s religious discrimination suit.

In 2001 Richard Peterson was fired by Hewlett-Packard after he..

continue reading this article…….

King James Only

Updated October 6, 2015 (first published January 20, 1996) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143,

There is a lot of debate and confusion surrounding the man-made term "King James Onlyism." It has been popularized in recent years by men who claim they are concerned about a dangerous and cultic view of the King James Bible. Rarely do they carefully define the term, though, and as a result a wide variety of Bible-believing men are labeled with a nebulously-defined term.

The term “King James Only” was invented by those who oppose the defense of the King James Bible and its underlying Hebrew and Greek texts. It was intended to be a term of approbation, and it is usually defined in terms of extremism.

I have been labeled “King James Only” because of my writings on the subject of Bible texts and versions. To set the record straight, let me explain what I believe. I know from decades of experience and extensive travels that this is also what a large number of other King James Bible defenders believe.


If “King James Only” defines
one who believes that God has given infallible Scripture in the original Greek and Hebrew writings and that He has preserved that in the Hebrew Masoretic and Greek Received Text and that we have a beautiful translation of it in the English language in the Authorized Version, call me “King James Only.”

If “King James Only” defines
one who believes modern textual criticism is heresy, call me “King James Only.” Prior to the Internet era, I spent hundreds of dollars to obtain the writings of the men who have been at the forefront of developing the theories underlying modern textual criticism, and I have read them. They are not dependable. They refuse to approach the Bible text from a position of faith in divine preservation. Most of them are out-and-out heretics, and I refuse to lean upon their scholarship. I am convinced they do not have the spiritual discernment necessary to know where the inspired, preserved Word of God is located today.

If “King James Only” defines
one who believes that God has preserved the Scripture in its common use among apostolic churches through the fulfillment of the Great Commission and that He guided the Reformation editors and translators in their choice of the Received Text and that we don’t have to start all over today in an to attempt to find the preserved text of Scripture, call me “King James Only.” The theories of modern textual criticism all revolve around the idea that the pure text of Scripture was not preserved in the Reformation..

continue reading this article…….

Friday Church News Notes, Volume 16, Issue 40

The Friday Church News Notes is designed for use in churches and is published by Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Unless otherwise stated, the Notes are written by David Cloud. Of necessity we quote from a wide variety of sources, though this does not imply an endorsement.

The Pope and the President
THE PAPACY’S FEARFUL LIES (Friday Church News Notes, October 2, 2015,, 866-295-4143) - Pope Francis heads up an institution founded on lies, so it is little surprise that his messages during the recent trip to America were filled with the same. Rome’s lies include the papacy itself, the priesthood, the sacraments, Mariolatry, purgatory, and “holy relics.” There is not a hint in Scripture that Peter had “supremacy” over the apostles or that he was otherwise any kind of “pope.” It was a wretched lie from its inception. For hundreds of years, the popes used forgeries such as the Donation of Constantine, a shameless lie claiming that Constantine gave the bishop of Rome supremacy “over all the churches of God in the whole earth,” granting him a crown, and donating to him “the city of Rome, and all the provinces, places and cities of Italy and the western regions.” Pope Hadrian I (778) used this lie in his dealings with Charlemagne. It was used by other popes until it was publicly exposed as a lie during the Reformation. Then there were the Decretals of Isidore, used by Pope Francis’ brother in scarlet, Nicholas I, to claim that popes “hold the place of God on earth.” These ancient lies have never been renounced by the papacy. By holding the office, regardless of how “humbly,” Francis agrees with its foundational lies, so it is no surprise that his messages are filled with more lies. Consider his message at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, September 25. First, there was his whitewash of the Catholic Church’s “clergy sex abuse scandal.” Addressing his fellow priests, he said: “[Y]ou suffered greatly ... by having to bear the shame of some of your brothers who harmed and scandalized the Church in the most vulnerable of her members.” The “some” actually amounts to thousands of priests who used their positions of trust to commit filthy acts with children, mostly boys. A 2004 study by John Jay College found 11,757 allegations of sexual abuse involving 5,148 priests, and the report only pertained to about half of the priests in the U.S. By then, the Catholic Church had already spent $1 billion settling lawsuits and providing “treatment” for its filthy priests, and the report observed that “the end is nowhere in sight.” The pope also lied in his address at St. Patrick’s by addressing Muslims as “brothers and sisters.” Muhammad blasphemously denied that Jesus is the Son of God who died for man’s sins. The Quran says, “Warn those who say, ‘Allah has fathered a son.’ They do not have any proof about that and neither did their fathers. It is a terrible thing that comes from their mouths. They say nothing but lies” (Surah 18:4). Instead of calling Muhammad and his people brothers and sisters, the pope should rather state that the “proof” Muhammad demanded is the virgin birth, sinless and unique life, vicarious atonement, and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, all based on amazing prophecies written down before He was born. If Jesus Christ is not the Son of God, there is no such thing as evidence. But then, the pope doesn’t believe the gospel of salvation by the free grace of Christ without works, so he has no truth with which to confront any false religion. Another lie that the pope spoke at St. Patrick’s was the lie that Mary hears and answers prayer. He said, “Let us commend to our Lady the work we have been entrusted to do.” Its vain protestations aside, Rome’s doctrine of Mary is a blasphemous usurpation of Christ as sole Saviour and Mediator, and this fact alone should impel every Bible-believing Christian to renounce the papacy in no uncertain terms. The very fact that plain speaking about the Roman Catholic Church is so rare among “evangelical” Protestants and Baptists is irrefutable proof of end-time apostasy and of the rapid building of the one-world “church.”

IS ROME THE HARLOT OF REVELATION 17? (Friday Church News Notes, October 2, 2015,, 866-295-4143) - For a thousand years and more, Baptists, Protestants, and fundamentalists identified Rome with the Harlot of Revelation 17. At the end of the NINTH CENTURY, “Tergandus, Bishop of Treves, called the Pope antichrist, yea, a wolf, and Rome, Babylon” (Martyrs Mirror, 5th English edition, p. 240). In THE ELEVENTH CENTURY, Berenger of Tours denounced Rome’s dogmas and maintained that the Roman Church was ..

continue to full edition of Friday News..

King James Translators - John Rainolds

September 30, 2015 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143,

The following is excerpted from THE GLORIOUS HERITAGE OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE (D. Cloud). The King James Bible is not merely another translation. Its history is one of the most fascinating chapters of church history and reads almost like a novel. This book traces this glorious heritage, beginning with the Wycliffe Bible of the 14th century. Every English-speaking believer should know this history; yet, sadly, even in the staunchest Bible-believing churches it is rare to find someone who is informed about the great price that was paid to provide us with an excellent Bible in our own language. Chapters include the Wycliffe Bible (1380), the Tyndale New Testament (1526), the Coverdale Bible (1535), the Matthew’s Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1557), the Bishops Bible (1568), and the King James Bible (1611). Under the section on the KJV we look at the spiritual and literary and scholarly climate of that day, the amazing translation process itself, the peerless translators, the nature of the translation, Tyndale’s influence, and the KJV’s worldwide influence. We also answer the following questions: Was King James a homosexual? Hasn’t the KJV been revised and updated in thousands of places? Could the KJV be revised again? Is the King James Bible inspired? Isn’t the KJV too antiquated and difficult to read? The author has studied this history diligently. He has a massive private library of materials on this subject dating back to the 16th century and has researched the subject in many parts of the world, including England, Wales, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Illustrated. 228 pages. $9.95

HISTORY OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE (DVD). This presentation covers the fascinating history of the King James Bible from the 15th to the 17th centuries. We preached the lectures at a Bible Conference in Singapore in recognition of the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Bible. The messages cover John Wycliffe, William Tyndale and the King James translators. 2.5 hours on one DVD. This set comes on one DVD. The download set consists of 3 individual .mp4 video files.

The translators of the King James Bible were scholars of the highest caliber. Many of them were among the very top scholars of England and Europe. As a body they were masters not only of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin, but also of the cognate or associate languages that are necessary for research into ancient documents relative to the Bible. These include Persian, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldee. Many of the KJV translators were men of unusual piety, as well, and were bold in their denunciation of “popery.”

John Rainolds (or Reynolds) (1549-1607), the leader of the Puritan party at Hampton Court, was president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. He had become a Fellow of Corpus Christi at age 17 and a Greek lecturer at age 23. McClure observes: “It is stated that ‘his memory was little less than miraculous.’ He could readily turn to any material passage, in every leaf, page, column and paragraph of the numerous and voluminous works he had read. He came to be styled ‘the very treasury of erudition;’ and was spoken of as ‘a living library, and a third university.’” “This Dr. Reynolds was party to a most curious episode. He had been an ardent Roman Catholic, and he had a brother who was an equally ardent Protestant. They argued with each other so earnestly that each convinced the other; the Roman Catholic became a Protestant, and the Protestant became a Roman Catholic” (Ian Paisley, My Plea for the Old Sword). John Rainolds’ Catholic brother, William, taught divinity and Hebrew at the English College at Rheims and probably assisted Gregory Martin in the translation of the Rheims-Douay Catholic Bible that was published in 1610 (Opfell, p. 56).

continue reading this article..