Christian? Considering Trump Yes/No? Watch this.

Youtube ^

[BereanBrain]

Check out the introduction at https://youtu.be/wmg-TMVYUcc

[Springfield Reformer]

I understand what you are saying, but the apostolic presentation of the Gospel is inseparable from repentance, which is an implied recognition of wrongdoing. Also consider Jesus’ parable of the two men, one who thanked God for his legal perfection, the other who couldn’t even look heavenward and begged God for mercy. Jesus specifically teaches it is the humble beggar for mercy who goes home justified, and not the person who is unaware of their own sinfulness.

So yes, I agree Jesus did pay it all, but I also know from Scripture how people come to Christ. It’s like Pilgrim’s Progress. You come to the small gate, and you shed your burden of sin, or you don’t get in. The unrepentant do not benefit from the death of Christ until and unless they repent. That is what it means to believe. We believe God, who tells us our sins are a death sentence, and we believe in Jesus as the only one who can commute that sentence, by the authority of His own death and resurrection. Short of that belief, the sinner will die in their sins, even those who think they are perfect, just as Jesus taught.

Peace,

ST

[BereanBrain]

I whole-heartedly agree on repenting, and asking for forgiveness.

But they are not what causes a person to be saved. They are an outflowing of being saved. Just as Baptism is.

Why is it important? Because by adding to the Word of God, we are doing the same as the Pharasees did.

You have to CATCH a fish before you clean it.

[JennysCool]

Very thoughtful post. Thank you!

[LowOiL]

If you require everyone to ask for your forgiveness, be very careful, because the bible is clear with the fact that whatever manner of judge you are, that is how you will be judged. I would hope you stay up late at night trying to figure out what you might have done (knowingly or even unknowingly) that might have offended God, because if you forget to ask for forgiveness......

I am going to quote a pastor I heard on this subject.

"Judge not" is the Hypocrites Golden Rule. For "judge not" (Mat. 7:1-5) is simply a hypocrites application of do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Mat. 7:12). "For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged" (Mat. 7:2). Judge others as you would have them do unto you inverted is Judge not if you do not want to be judged. Therefore the hypocrite does not judge. As Jesus said, "Judge not... you hypocrite" (Mat. 7:1, 5 KJV; Ezek. 16:52).

Jesus warned against judging falsely or with hypocrisy. For immediately after saying "judge not," Jesus taught just how to judge correctly:

"And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?... Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye." Mat. 7:3, 5

[BereanBrain]

I said be careful - because you will be judged the way you judge others.

Matt 7:2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

Likewise, if you don’t forgive others, you won’t be forgiven.

Mark 11:26 “But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father who is in heaven forgive your transgressions.”

So, i would say if we should easily forgive others. I know it’s hard.

If you want to see a model of how a Christian should forgive here’s one

https://www.guideposts.org/inspiration/stories-of-hope/guideposts-classics-corrie-ten-boom-on-forgiveness?nopaging=1

[LowOiL]

I said be careful

Oh I agree, we are to "judge rightly".

“Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24).

[BereanBrain]

You are big enough to do your own thing, but trust me, you want to tread lightly on judging others.

There are two sense of “judge” at play.

One is “to discriminate between things” - which we should do, under the power of the Holy Spirit.

The other is being judgmental toward other humans, or think we know their relationship with God, or act in God’s place. This is wrong, and we are in danger when we do it.

Consider, for example, Jude 1:9 But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

Now, I can think of the folks who run around with signs and comments about “gays are going to hell” and such. Actually, we ALL DESERVE hell. Focusing on what they deserve instead of the power of redemption and salvation through Jesus is NOT weak - it’s the ONLY power to change lives we have.

Satan is called “the accuser” for a reason. Let’s not help him.

[Colofornian]

Yep I am capable of making my own decision. Really don’t want anyone preaching at me. That includes the Pope and I am Catholic. So keep it a private thing!

(Yet you're publicly preaching to Springfield Reformer to keep things private!???)

So let's review:

1. Is this discussion about religious things? (Yup)
2. Is this a public discussion about religious things...vs. a private convo? (Yup)
3. Is every post on this given thread discussing religious things? (Yup)
4. Isn't discussing religious things a form of preaching? (Yup)
5. So you can impose upon others what you don't want to be preached about religiously? (Apparently so)
6. But aren't you imposing upon others religiously when you give them an absolute religious absolute like "Really don't want ANYONE preaching at me..." (apparently so)

[Colofornian]

Care to tell us how you became so self righteous?

Aw...so you don't want anybody publicly preaching at you...but apparently you've given yourself some exceptions' license to preach @ others about their alleged levels of self-righteousness, eh?

Inconsistent at the very least; appears to be downright religious hypocrisy on your part.

[Springfield Reformer]

And yet Jesus taught us that we would know false prophets by their fruit. There are things we can and should know about the spiritual state of others. That is not the same as becoming an accuser, which in Satan’s case is tied to his hatred of God and all manner of righteousness. Paul as apostle was not shy about holding people to account for their sins, even private sins, and even spiritual sins. Likewise Peter told Simon Magus, who had professed faith and even been baptized, that he was still in his sins.

The Body of Christ has the right, the duty, and the ability to exercise spiritual discernment and protect the flock from wolves disguised as sheep. That’s what a shepherd does. We cannot accept rules of engagement with our spiritual enemies that would allow them to gain an advantage over us. We are to occupy until He comes, not be the food of wolves.

Putting it bluntly, in any number of churches I have been a part of, if someone wanted to join who had no testimony of seeking forgiveness for his sins at the foot of the cross, the proper judgment of the elders would ordinarily be that this person did not yet understand the Gospel or their own dire spiritual state and would not be recognized as a Christian or allowed into church membership. This would not be an act of asserting spiritual superiority, which is what Jesus forbade, but it would be righteous judgment, which Jesus extolled.

Peace,

SR

[BereanBrain]

I think you are confusing church discipline with personal interactions, and prophets with believers.

Yes, the church is to have discipline. The Body of Christ is not equal to each believer. If it were, anything any believer in a church did would hold the authority of the church - it is clear it does not. This is why we have Pastors and Elders. I do not think I have the mantle of Peter, nor would I guess you do either.

How does one know what is in the heart of another? This is why we must as believers tread very carefully. Also, I don’t believe you can save someone by beating them over the head with their sins. Only the Holy Spirit can convict them of their sins.

As for trying to stop someone from joining the church, I will say what was said of Peter, by Gamaliel, rebuking the Pharisee

Acts 5:38 For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”

Get used to it, we ARE sheep. Sheep don’t grow wise, or sprout sharp teeth and claws - they rely on the Good Shepherd to protect them. Likewise so should we.

[Springfield Reformer]

I think you are confusing church discipline with personal interactions, and prophets with believers.

No, I do not think that is the problem. There are differing duties as between the overseers and those they oversee, but all have an equal duty before God to avoid unseemly associations:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
(2 Corinthians 6:14-17)

This is a general command.  It applies to all believers. It is not limited to the elders or to the exercise of church discipline.  It is an expression of our being set aside by God for His purposes and for fellowship with Him as His people.  How can we obey this command without being able to recognize and distinguish brother from infidel, believer from unbeliever? How could God command us to do what was impossible to do?

Yes, the church is to have discipline. The Body of Christ is not equal to each believer. If it were, anything any believer in a church did would hold the authority of the church - it is clear it does not. This is why we have Pastors and Elders. I do not think I have the mantle of Peter, nor would I guess you do either.

I understand church authority as a series of jurisdictions. Christ has jurisdiction over the entire body of believers. The elders have jurisdiction over the local fellowship.  The heads of households have jurisdiction over their family.  And individual believers have jurisdiction over their own spirits. In that sense every believer has some share of responsibility and capability to exercise spiritual discernment, and to steer clear of those who stand outside the teaching of the word of God.

How does one know what is in the heart of another? This is why we must as believers tread very carefully.

Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks:

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
(Luke 6:45)

So we do have a divinely sanctioned way to discern what is happening in people's hearts, their testimony.  And while I agree with your principle of caution, I do not think we can allow that to paralyze us with fear that disables us from doing our duty, whether in our private jurisdiction, or as the head of a family, or as elders of a fellowship.

Also, I don’t believe you can save someone by beating them over the head with their sins. Only the Holy Spirit can convict them of their sins.

I do not recall suggesting beating anyone over the head.  But I can tell you this. Paul is right when he says that love rejoices in the truth.  There isn't a more loving thing you can do for somebody than to warn them that their lack of repentance from sin will send them into a horrific eternity. Some reader here will know of someone in their life, whom they love dearly, who rejects the plain truth of their need for redemption in Christ, who gives no sign of spiritual life, with whom there is no fellowship in the Spirit, nor any blossoming of the fruits of the Spirit.  Does this tragic person bring out some urge in a believer to beat them up with their sins? Hardly.  More likely it brings on hidden sorrow, private tears, prayers heard by no one but God, a desperate wish to trade places with that person, a passion to help them avoid the fate that approaches.  Love rejoices in the truth, because only in truth can there be healing.

And yes the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, but far from shutting our mouth, we open it with the Gospel even wider, because we know that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.  We do plant, and we do water, though we acknowledge it is only God who gives the increase.

As for trying to stop someone from joining the church, I will say what was said of Peter, by Gamaliel, rebuking the Pharisee Acts 5:38 For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”

This is a badly misapplied Scripture as you are using it. I have no doubt God used the unbeliever Gamaliel to protect the newborn Christian faith from persecution. But Gamaliel's example is not a directive of or to the ecclesia of Christ.  Rather, the elders of the local assembly are within their jurisdiction to reject false members, just as Peter did, and for the same reasons, which apply as well now as they did in the book of Acts. There is a test for fellowship:

And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.
(2 Thessalonians 3:14-15)

So we see we are under apostolic command to avoid fellowship with wayward individuals, those who do not subject themselves to the teaching of Holy Scripture. Yet even in doing so, we do not treat them with pride or hostility, but with the urgent pleading of love, because it is as much for them as for ourselves that we set the barrier on fellowship.

Get used to it, we ARE sheep. Sheep don’t grow wise, or sprout sharp teeth and claws - they rely on the Good Shepherd to protect them. Likewise so should we.

The metaphor of the sheep is to teach us our dependence on our Great Shepherd.  But one cannot press a metaphor beyond it's limits.  We are also to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.  And some of the sheep are also shepherds, the undershepherds, whose duty it is to feed and protect the flock God has put under their care:

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
(1 Peter 5:1-4)

We see then there is a Chief Shepherd, Jesus, who has immediate jurisdiction over the elders, and these elders do care for the flock as undershepherds. The principle duty is feeding, but watching for the spiritual safety of the flock is also in view:

Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
(Hebrews 13:17)

So these undershepherds must give account to the Chief Shepherd. Defending the fellowship from unbelievers and disobedient believers is not an option.  It is an obligation of the calling. Failure to do so will lead to grief:

Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
(Acts 20:28-31)

Failure of the elders to warn the sheep of the threat of wolves is a failure to love, and a refusal to obey their commission as the undershepherds God has called them to be. Failure of the sheep to heed the warnings of the elders is foolishness that leads to great danger, and a wise sheep will avoid the trap of making friends with wolves.

Peace,

SR

[BereanBrain]

I seem to remember Jesus being accused of hanging out with sinners. Obviously it’s not a sin.

It’s not our job to determine who is or is not a believer - Only God can know. God judges the heart.

What good is it of us to “recognize and distinguish brother from infidel”? Did not God (in the person of Jesus Christ) die for those who were lost? Do not be fooled - God is not willing that any should perish, but all come to repentance. That scripture only makes sense if Man does indeed have free will. Otherwise God is not all powerful, which we know is not the case.

That God so loved the WORLD that he gave his ONLY begotten Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him will have eternal life.

It does not say God has picked out his chosen, and you guys stay away from the unclean ones while you are down there, because there is no hope for them.

No, God is not a being restricted by Time and Space such as you and I. God can, and does foreknow WHO will come to repentance. He sees it easier than I can look down a hall and see what’s at the other end.

Because He is the Alpha and the Omega, and He created time, and will cause it to pass away as well. In this way, God predestines to sanctification those who come to him, who he foreknows, but does NOT cause to happen, as the decision of belief is the responsibility of the person, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

There is no construct you have to build on top of the bible to resolve the tension between free will and predestination. That tension only exists if you think of God as being limited by time an space, like us.

What were the early Christians KNOWN by - what spread the faith?
Was it the fact that they met in churches (they didn’t), or kept to themselves (they didn’t).

What changed the world was LOVE. The LOVE that the Christians held for one another and the unsaved was beyond anything ever seen. They would DIE for each other or even speak out to an unbeliever who would turn them in, and then that unbeliever would see that even when enduring a horrible death, that they still would not renounce that God was good. Read Foxe’s book of Martyrs sometime when you feel you are being persecuted.

And WE are too troubled by having to put up with a few bad apples?
Go to Syria or Iraq and claim the name of Christ and see what bad apples are!

Would a man venture to give his life for a righteous friend? Perhaps.
But who would give their life for an enemy? We were God’s enemies. THIS is the power of Christ.

Who are your enemies?

The world has enough religion. It needs more of the Love of God.

No, I know it’s not that simple. It means you will love someone who does not love you back. They may never come to Christ. That’s uncomfortable. But we have to put our trust in God, not our view of the world.

We should still love the sinner. We cannot share the Gospel without sharing with a sinner. You cannot influence anyone you don’t have a relationship with. This is why God sends his Holy Spirit even to the unbelievers - to struggle with them (See Romans 1:20-40)

Interacting with someone is not being “yoked” with an unbeliever. That verse refers to attending religious rites of other religions or pagan rites with them! Or in a stretch, being married to them.

May God bless your reading of His Holy Word.

[Springfield Reformer]

I seem to remember Jesus being accused of hanging out with sinners. Obviously it’s not a sin.

God cannot be drawn into error or sin by associating with sinners.  We can. But having said that, the accusation against Jesus is misleading.  Jesus and any sound believer should engage sincere inquirers.  But do you think Jesus would casually enter a brothel and do nothing while sin continued in His presence?  An unrepentant sinner has chosen separation from God.  As you yourself have already said, God may well convict such a person.  You and I are not God.  While we have our imperfect natures in this life, we must watch to keep our robes unspotted.  

It’s not our job to determine who is or is not a believer - Only God can know. God judges the heart.

Wrong.  As noted earlier, we have an explicit duty to identify our siblings in Christ, and avoid unnecessary entanglements with those who continue to willfully rebel against God. Only God can determine their final outcome, and we should not presume to think they can never change. But while they are in a state of obvious unbelief, it is right and good to acknowledge their lostness, and an essential first step to leading them home.  

What good is it of us to “recognize and distinguish brother from infidel”? Did not God (in the person of Jesus Christ) die for those who were lost? Do not be fooled - God is not willing that any should perish, but all come to repentance. That scripture only makes sense if Man does indeed have free will. Otherwise God is not all powerful, which we know is not the case.

Infidel is Paul's word.  God's Spirit inspired Paul to say that. If you cannot see the good in making such a distinction, you are not fighting me, but divine truth breathed by the Spirit of God into the words of God's apostle.

That God so loved the WORLD that he gave his ONLY begotten Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him will have eternal life.

Whoever believes in Jesus will have eternal life. Yes.  Those who say they believe in Him but do not believe they are sinners, what is their estate?  Even the devils believe, and it does them no good, because they do not repent. Jesus didn't come for those who think they are perfect. Remember?  He came for the sick and the lost.  The two men in the temple, the one self-righteous, no acknowledgment of sin, the other feeling unworthy to even look toward heaven. The one counted himself blessed for how righteous he was.  The other begged God for mercy on him, a sinner. Repentance.  Which one went home justified?  "Believing" in Jesus without repentance is a crock.

It does not say God has picked out his chosen, and you guys stay away from the unclean ones while you are down there, because there is no hope for them.

Well, you are mixing truth with untruth here (not intentionally, I am sure). Your statement represents no one's actual theology that I know of. Yes, God did pick out His chosen.  He said so.  His apostles said so.  That's what it means to be chosen. He picked you.  But we don't "stay away" from the unclean ones. As I said before, we love the lost, we seek their salvation, we teach them the Gospel, we let our light shine so they may be attracted to it.

But we do not delude ourselves that those who refuse to repent are our brothers and sisters in Christ, because they are not. And we do not accord them the high privilege of fellowship within the body of Christ, not until they have crossed the same threshold of faith all believers must cross to be recognized as believers.  The Gospel message has always been, "Repent and believe," and we have no authority to give place to another Gospel.

No, God is not a being restricted by Time and Space such as you and I. God can, and does foreknow WHO will come to repentance. He sees it easier than I can look down a hall and see what’s at the other end.

The "time tunnel" theory of predestination makes for fun science fiction, but it is not the teaching of Scripture. And not relevant to this discussion.

Because He is the Alpha and the Omega, and He created time, and will cause it to pass away as well. In this way, God predestines to sanctification those who come to him, who he foreknows, but does NOT cause to happen, as the decision of belief is the responsibility of the person, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Again, this is fascinating speculation, but it's a red herring.  For purposes of our discussion, both an Arminian and a Calvinist should be able to draw the same conclusion, that believers can and must recognize those who believe the Gospel as their brothers in Christ and those who reject the Gospel as lost and the proper subjects of evangelism.  

There is no construct you have to build on top of the bible to resolve the tension between free will and predestination. That tension only exists if you think of God as being limited by time an space, like us.

Again, this is not relevant. The question before us, IMHO, is whether a believer can know and recognize another believer, based on Biblical criteria, the fruit of the Spirit, the fellowship of the Spirit, but most important of all, belief in the old-fashioned Gospel, that we must repent and believe in Jesus, else we are lost.  That is no man-made "construct" loosely floating on top of the Bible.  It is the divine message of the Scriptures, the heart and soul of the Christian faith, the very Gospel itself, and one cannot be a Christian without believing that Gospel.

What were the early Christians KNOWN by - what spread the faith?
 Was it the fact that they met in churches (they didn’t), or kept to themselves (they didn’t).

Errors here. I have never once spoken against Christians showing love to the lost or to each other.  They do and they must.  But as to meetings, yes they did so meet, and it is astonishing you would suggest they did not.  Certainly they lacked buildings in some circumstances, but often they would meet in the homes of believers, and later the homes of the more prosperous believers were modified to accommodate regular gatherings of believers. And they were not random about admitting members.  You had to be a learner for a time before you were baptized, giving some evidence of faith, or as Jesus once said, showing the fruits of repentance.

What changed the world was LOVE. The LOVE that the Christians held for one another and the unsaved was beyond anything ever seen. They would DIE for each other or even speak out to an unbeliever who would turn them in, and then that unbeliever would see that even when enduring a horrible death, that they still would not renounce that God was good. Read Foxe’s book of Martyrs sometime when you feel you are being persecuted.

Again, when have I ever said a word against love?  I agree fully it was love that marked them as believers, yes, but they came by that love honestly, because they believed the Gospel, having repented of their former ways, and turned to faith in Jesus Christ. All of sin is anti-love.  That is what people must repent of. Without repenting from anti-love, they cannot love.

BTW, I have read substantial portions of Foxe's Book of Martyrs, and my father read it before me.  It was a big part of my formation of faith.

Incidentally, Foxe does not hold your view of election:

http://www.covenanter.org/reformed/2015/8/17/john-foxes-notes-appertaining-to-the-matter-of-election-gathered

Nor does he hold your view of separation.  If you read his book, you know these martyrs could have had a life of ease under Queen Mary if only they had been uncritical of the impurities in the English Church. Foxe in fact is thought to be one of the founding fathers of English puritanism, and given the price for purity the martyrs were willing to pay, it is no wonder hs book was such an inspiration to the movement.

And WE are too troubled by having to put up with a few bad apples?
 Go to Syria or Iraq and claim the name of Christ and see what bad apples are!

Red Herring.  This isn't about Islamic persecution of the body of Christ. This is about whether the Gospel is the challenging Gospel of Scripture, or the Gospel of an insipid universalism that rejects a distinction between saved and lost.

Would a man venture to give his life for a righteous friend? Perhaps.
 But who would give their life for an enemy? We were God’s enemies. THIS is the power of Christ.

Yes, because it was necessary for us to be loved before we could love in return. Likewise, we love the lost before they can return love to us in Christ, and so we follow His example.  But as I said before, love rejoices in the truth. If you love a lost person, you do not let them rest easy in their lostness. You must see that they are lost, and give them testimony from the word of God how they may be saved, that is, if they will repent and believe in Jesus.  For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, that first condemns a man by pointing out his failure to live up to the righteousness required by God, and then points to the way of relief, the payment for that sin in the blood of Jesus Christ.

Who are your enemies?

We wrestle not against flesh and blood, it is true.  Nevertheless, we do have enemies. Jesus said we should love our enemies, so we must have enemies. But our enemies are those who oppose their own best interests, more objects of pity than scorn, and always objects of our love, but not to be embraced for being something they are not.  If they are enemies of the cross, we cannot pretend they are just slightly offish brothers in the faith:

Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)
(Philippians 3:17-19)

The world has enough religion. It needs more of the Love of God.

False dichotomy. The world needs the true religion, which is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the power of God unto salvation, that which takes a dead sinner and raises him to newness of life, and membership in the body of Christ.  

No, I know it’s not that simple. It means you will love someone who does not love you back. They may never come to Christ. That’s uncomfortable. But we have to put our trust in God, not our view of the world.

If we did not disagree on the understanding of fellowship, I would have no reason to disagree with you on this. However, if by love you mean we must turn a blind eye to someone being lost, or be afraid to say they are not a Christian if they fail to repent, then I'd have a problem with that.

We should still love the sinner. We cannot share the Gospel without sharing with a sinner. You cannot influence anyone you don’t have a relationship with. This is why God sends his Holy Spirit even to the unbelievers - to struggle with them (See Romans 1:20-40)

All true, and all irrelevant to the point, which is whether we can know with confidence someone who rejects the Gospel is lost.  This does not preclude their later conversion, but there is no sense wallowing in uncertainty over their present condition. In their unrepentant state they are children of wrath, and have only doom to expect at the end of their days.

Interacting with someone is not being “yoked” with an unbeliever. That verse refers to attending religious rites of other religions or pagan rites with them! Or in a stretch, being married to them.

I do not object to interacting with lost people.  I do it every day at work.  What I object to is cowering in some fearful place unwilling to say whether anyone is lost or saved because I might be misjudging them.  If they have for their testimony a belief no better than that of the devil, because their life remains unchanged, and they have no remorse for sin, then no good Christian should withhold from evangelizing them as a person who is definitely lost, whether they are the janitor or the pastor, a nobody or a national figure.  If they have rejected the Gospel, they are still in their sins, and will have a wretched eternity if they do not repent.

May God bless your reading of His Holy Word.

And you as well.

Peace,

SR

[BereanBrain]

It’s been wonderful back and forth.

I don’t think either of us changed our view one whit.

As an aside, I know the classical views, and come from them. I have looked into the fruit that fell from Calvin’s life, and how he treated others he differed with. And been labeled an Arminian by reformers as if that’s the only option one can be. My handle is BereanBrain. Maybe you know what the Beareans were commended for in scripture?

On your “voting” method of argument (i.e. what Foxe thought on a particular subject) - it does NOT matter what someone once thought - Every believer is not right on every topic, nor is there a “theology test” for salvation. Putting weight on what others thought without developing your own salvation with fear and trembling by reading God’s word is called TRADITION.

What is sad is that the reformers rebelled against the excesses and bad theology and tradition of the Catholic church and in turn have over the years created their own.

Fare well, I will meet my God with clear conscious.