jayce475
Puritan Board Freshman
John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me
John 10:3-5 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
Hi all,
I've lately been very troubled by these verses. The question keeps ringing "If Jesus' sheep hear His voice, and the sheep definitely refer to the elect, does that mean that all people who spend their whole lives in churches that embrace error and fail to ever be biblically separated from such churches are all eternally lost since they have followed strangers?"
Modern mainlne evangelicals, at least those who do preach the doctrines of salvation faithfully, always draw this line between such doctrines and peripheral ones. "As long as a person believes depravity and the life, death and resurrection of Christ, whatever else he believes should not be made a matter of dogmatic debate."
I am starting to become really uncomfortable with such a position but do not wish to swing wildly the other way and start calling all people who do not share my convictions. Such convictions include tenets of bible presbyterianism, inclusive of biblical separation from worldly forms of worship and lifestyles, cessationism, paedobaptism, CT, Calvinism, different modes of baptism being acceptable, premillenialism and and a personal stance on post-tribulationalism. It's oft said that we should major on the major and minor on the minor, so my way of preventing myself from swinging to far the other way is that issues that are not explicit from the bible and need certain implicit deductions should not be issues of great concern. Therefore, it is alright if I have a brother who has a different eschatology, is credobaptist and does only immersion baptism, subscribes to EP, holds on to dispensationalism (but is not antinomian), simply because these things are not explicit from scriptures.
On the other hand, there are those things that are explicit from scriptures. These would concern the matters of the doctrines of grace, charismatism and biblical separation from worldliness. Many keep telling me that it is alright if a person is Arminian, is a careful charismatic (like John Piper), uses contemporary worship in the sense of the self-indulgent sorts of Hillsongs and the Passion conference, and lives a life embracing pop cultures as long as he is generally a good Christian steering clear of gross immorality. Really? But scriptures are so clear against all of these! Usually in my circles, we always use the copout response whenever we are asked whether charismatics and Arminians are saved by saying that if they are saved they will eventually come out of those churches. But what about those who have spent their entire lives in Charismatic and Arminian churches? Of course, if a person is on the deathbed and has never been exposed to any cessationist and Calvinistic doctrines, has never been taught about how un-Christian pop culture is and has never even heard about RPW, they never have the chance to hear the Shepherd's voice regarding these issues and so may still be soundly saved and long as they have the gospel. However, that is almost never the case for most Christians. They spend years and years having access to the Word of God, they have internet, bible study tools and all means and ways to repent from erroneous doctrines, and yet somehow come to the conclusion that there is no need to do so. They do not hear the Shepherd's voice and are following strangers, so does that mean that they are not the sheep (elect?). We the bible-presbyterians from Singapore often soften our stance whenever we talk about John Wesley and John Sung, because most believe that they were godly and holy men used by God despite their Arminianism. Are we going to wake up in glory to find these men on the wrong side of eternity?
I know it is never our position to separate the wheat from the tares and salvation is always of the Lord, but there are immense implications on how we approach conversations with Arminians, charismatics, those who refuse biblical separation from the world and those who reject RPW. Should we be outrightly telling them that these are all gross errors that they need to leave if they are the true sheep of Christ, or are we going to simply share with them what we think is right but then pull back and say "But it is alright, we just share different 'convictions'"? I find myself doing the latter so so often just so that I won't offend anyone at all, but above all, all that I really desire to do is God's will. Please advise.
John 10:3-5 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
Hi all,
I've lately been very troubled by these verses. The question keeps ringing "If Jesus' sheep hear His voice, and the sheep definitely refer to the elect, does that mean that all people who spend their whole lives in churches that embrace error and fail to ever be biblically separated from such churches are all eternally lost since they have followed strangers?"
Modern mainlne evangelicals, at least those who do preach the doctrines of salvation faithfully, always draw this line between such doctrines and peripheral ones. "As long as a person believes depravity and the life, death and resurrection of Christ, whatever else he believes should not be made a matter of dogmatic debate."
I am starting to become really uncomfortable with such a position but do not wish to swing wildly the other way and start calling all people who do not share my convictions. Such convictions include tenets of bible presbyterianism, inclusive of biblical separation from worldly forms of worship and lifestyles, cessationism, paedobaptism, CT, Calvinism, different modes of baptism being acceptable, premillenialism and and a personal stance on post-tribulationalism. It's oft said that we should major on the major and minor on the minor, so my way of preventing myself from swinging to far the other way is that issues that are not explicit from the bible and need certain implicit deductions should not be issues of great concern. Therefore, it is alright if I have a brother who has a different eschatology, is credobaptist and does only immersion baptism, subscribes to EP, holds on to dispensationalism (but is not antinomian), simply because these things are not explicit from scriptures.
On the other hand, there are those things that are explicit from scriptures. These would concern the matters of the doctrines of grace, charismatism and biblical separation from worldliness. Many keep telling me that it is alright if a person is Arminian, is a careful charismatic (like John Piper), uses contemporary worship in the sense of the self-indulgent sorts of Hillsongs and the Passion conference, and lives a life embracing pop cultures as long as he is generally a good Christian steering clear of gross immorality. Really? But scriptures are so clear against all of these! Usually in my circles, we always use the copout response whenever we are asked whether charismatics and Arminians are saved by saying that if they are saved they will eventually come out of those churches. But what about those who have spent their entire lives in Charismatic and Arminian churches? Of course, if a person is on the deathbed and has never been exposed to any cessationist and Calvinistic doctrines, has never been taught about how un-Christian pop culture is and has never even heard about RPW, they never have the chance to hear the Shepherd's voice regarding these issues and so may still be soundly saved and long as they have the gospel. However, that is almost never the case for most Christians. They spend years and years having access to the Word of God, they have internet, bible study tools and all means and ways to repent from erroneous doctrines, and yet somehow come to the conclusion that there is no need to do so. They do not hear the Shepherd's voice and are following strangers, so does that mean that they are not the sheep (elect?). We the bible-presbyterians from Singapore often soften our stance whenever we talk about John Wesley and John Sung, because most believe that they were godly and holy men used by God despite their Arminianism. Are we going to wake up in glory to find these men on the wrong side of eternity?
I know it is never our position to separate the wheat from the tares and salvation is always of the Lord, but there are immense implications on how we approach conversations with Arminians, charismatics, those who refuse biblical separation from the world and those who reject RPW. Should we be outrightly telling them that these are all gross errors that they need to leave if they are the true sheep of Christ, or are we going to simply share with them what we think is right but then pull back and say "But it is alright, we just share different 'convictions'"? I find myself doing the latter so so often just so that I won't offend anyone at all, but above all, all that I really desire to do is God's will. Please advise.