Can a individual church consist of ONLY elect or reprobate?

[InSlaveryToChrist]

I've been wondering from where in the Bible do we get the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY elect or reprobate, but must have both.

 

[J. Dean]

Truthfully... we don't know. We aren't God, and cannot tell who does or does not embrace saving faith. I've known more than one person who professed what appeared to be a strong Christian faith (and in some cases seemingly stronger than mine) who later in life rejected all of it. While we assume to a point that at least SOME church attenders are elect, we don't know for sure. That's one of the reasons that the ministers must make a habit of regularly proclaiming the gospel in a clear, concise way from the pulpit, so that people are aware that just showing up to church doesn't save you.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

Isn't it wrong, then, for the preacher to proclaim to the congregation (however big it is) that sadly some of them will spend an eternity in the lake of fire?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

See WLC 61-65 with the proofs.
Westminster Larger Catechism - The PuritanBoard

 

[J. Dean]

Isn't it wrong, then, for the preacher to proclaim to the congregation (however big it is) that sadly some of them will spend an eternity in the lake of fire?

It would be better worded to warn a congregation that just because you're showing up to church doesn't make you one of the elect, and explain salvation in totality, rather than to make a blanket statement about saying "some of you will/won't end up in the lake of fire/new heavens and new earth."

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

See WLC 61-65 with the proofs.
Westminster Larger Catechism - The PuritanBoard

With all due respect, Chris, the Reformed Confessions do not address this specific issue at all. I asked my OP question well aware of the visible/invisible church distinction, and the fact is that it does not imply whether or not all members of an individual church may be elect or reprobate. The visible/invisible distinction refers to ALL professing believers and their children, and ALL elect -- not a particular group of Christians in an individual church.

---------- Post added at 03:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:34 PM ----------

Isn't it wrong, then, for the preacher to proclaim to the congregation (however big it is) that sadly some of them will spend an eternity in the lake of fire?

It would be better worded to warn a congregation that just because you're showing up to church doesn't make you one of the elect, and explain salvation in totality, rather than to make a blanket statement about saying "some of you will/won't end up in the lake of fire/new heavens and new earth."

Sadly, I've seen even some Reformed preachers say things like that, one of whom is Paul Washer.

 

[rbcbob]

the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY elect

There may be (God only knows) an individual church which at this moment consists of ONLY those who are elect. Even so that could change tomorrow.

the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY ... reprobate

I dare say that there are individual churches that consist of ONLY the reprobate, including the preacher.


But to address your point- Preachers who say to some present in the assembly that they are reprobate is to say more than any preacher can know.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

Thanks for confirming that, elder Bob!

 

[jogri17]

wheat and tares. Read the Synoptic Gospels, its all over. The wise and foolish virgins. The parabole of the sower. etc.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I've been wondering from where in the Bible do we get the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY elect or reprobate, but must have both.

Isn't it wrong, then, for the preacher to proclaim to the congregation (however big it is) that sadly some of them will spend an eternity in the lake of fire?

The initial question is poorly posed given what you want to know. The issue is that we need not emphatically affirm or deny that any in a congregation are either elect or reprobate but to call all listening to heed the Word being preached and to issue the warning to any who would shrink back. Hebrews 3-6 is an example where clear warning (and example) is given where Paul neither assumes that all are either elect or reprobate but warns of the consequences of shrinking back in disbelief. Conversion is up to the Holy Spirit.

 

[earl40]

I've been wondering from where in the Bible do we get the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY elect or reprobate, but must have both.

I believe the larger the congregation the less "chance" all are elect.

 

[CharlieJ]

All the baptized are presumed elect until proven otherwise. They should all be addressed as "saints," "the people of God," and all the other things that the NT writers say to the recipients of their letters.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

I've been wondering from where in the Bible do we get the idea that any individual church cannot consist of ONLY elect or reprobate, but must have both.

Isn't it wrong, then, for the preacher to proclaim to the congregation (however big it is) that sadly some of them will spend an eternity in the lake of fire?

The initial question is poorly posed given what you want to know.

I wanted to know, first of all, where such practice/doctrine could be found in Scripture. I then made a follow-up question. What's wrong with that?

The issue is that we need not emphatically affirm or deny that any in a congregation are either elect or reprobate but to call all listening to heed the Word being preached and to issue the warning to any who would shrink back. Hebrews 3-6 is an example where clear warning (and example) is given where Paul neither assumes that all are either elect or reprobate but warns of the consequences of shrinking back in disbelief. Conversion is up to the Holy Spirit.

This is what I thought also. Thanks for confirming, Rich!