Refusing to hear Jesus' voice

Status
Not open for further replies.

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.
 

dudley

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
As a Presbyterian and a Calvinist My answer to you would be in the 5th point of the Five points of calviniam.....Perseverance of the Saints...

a. Those whom the Holy Spirit regenerates and brings to faith in Christ, will be kept by Christ (Jude 1; I Jn. 5:18 NASV, NIV) with the result that they will continue in the true faith and grow in Christ. They will not fall away and be lost. They have eternal life now, and forever.

b. Scriptural proof: Jn. 6:39; 10:28-29; Eph. 1:13-14; Phil. 1:6; I Pt 1:4-6.

c. Those passages which speak of "Christians" falling away and being lost have reference to mere "professors," not true "possessors," of the faith.

I am pasting here also the 5 points of Calvinism for you to also read as part of my response.

“Reformed” Theology"
Reformed theology takes its name from the Protestant Reformation which took place in the sixteenth century. These are the distinctive scriptural teachings that come out of the reformation. Reformed theology has often been called "Calvinism," after John Calvin who systematically taught these doctrines in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, and "Augustinianism" after Augustine who defended these doctrines in the 4th and 5th centuries.



The Emphasis


The sovereignty of God is the focal point of this system of doctrine which views the whole world from a God-centered outlook. Before the creation of this world, God planned all that would come to pass. He is in control of all things and is working all things out according to His will (Gen. 50:20; Isa. 46:10; Dan. 4:25,35; acts 2:23; 4:27-28; Eph. 1:4-5,11).



God's Sovereignty in Salvation



God's sovereignty over all things extends to the matter of salvation. The essential tenants of this system have come to be known as the 5 points of Calvinism that can be remembered by using the Tulip acrostic. The 5 points were affirmed at the Synod of Dort in 1618 as an answer to the 5 points of Jacob Arminius (1560-1609) which has come to be known as Arminianism.



The 5 Points of Calvinism:



1. Total Depravity (or Inability) of man

a. Every mere man since Adam is born with a sinful nature (Rom. 5:12) and sins (Rom. 3:23). No man can please God by his actions (Isa. 64:6).

b. No man understands the things of God (I Cor. 2:14). He does not desire to come to God (Jn. 1:13; Rom. 3:11). He does not have the ability in himself to accept Christ (Jn. 6:44,65; Eph. 2:1,5).



2. Unconditional Election

a. Left to themselves, all of fallen mankind would choose to reject God; the end result would be that all would end up in hell.

b. But God graciously elected (chose) to draw some to himself through the Holy Spirit.

c. This election was "unconditional" in that there was nothing in us to merit this election.

d. Scripture proof: Jn 6:37-39; 15:16; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:28-30; 9:11-23; Eph. 1:4-5; II Thess. 2:13.



3. Limited (or Particular) Atonement

a. Having thus elected some to eternal life, God sent forth His Son to secure their salvation by His death for their sins.

b. Both Calvinists and Arminians agree that the atonement is sufficient to pay for the sins of everyone in the world (it was an infinite payment), and that it is efficient only to those who accept Christ (only their sins will be forgiven that they may be in heaven). Where they differ is on the intent of the atonement. The Arminian says that Christ died to make it possible for all men to be saved, but not guaranteeing that any would actually be saved. The Calvinist states that Christ died to secure (guarantee) the salvation of God's elect (see Gal. 1:4; Matt. 1:21; Rom. 8:30).

c. Scripture proof: Christ died not to merely make salvation possible, but to actually save particular sinners (Mt. 1:21; Lk. 19:10; Gal. 1:4; I Tim. 1:15). Christ died for a particular group (Mt. 1:21; Jn. 10:11,15,26-28; Rom. 8:32-33; Eph. 5:25-27). God's work of salvation is an unbroken chain (Rom. 8:29-30; Eph. 2:4-10).



4. Irresistible (or Efficacious) Grace

a. When God does something the result is certain. When the Holy Spirit inwardly calls a person to believe, that person comes to Christ. We should not picture the person coming against his will. The Holy Spirit gives a new heart and so changes and motivates the man's will that he now desires and loves that which he before hated.

b. Shorter Catechism Question #31: What is effectual calling?

"Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit, whereby convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds to knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, He doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel."

c. Scripture proof: Jn. 1:13; 6:37,44,65; 10:16; Rom. 8:29-30; Eph. 2:8-10; Js. 1:18.



5. Perseverance of the Saints

a. Those whom the Holy Spirit regenerates and brings to faith in Christ, will be kept by Christ (Jude 1; I Jn. 5:18 NASV, NIV) with the result that they will continue in the true faith and grow in Christ. They will not fall away and be lost. They have eternal life now, and forever.

b. Scriptural proof: Jn. 6:39; 10:28-29; Eph. 1:13-14; Phil. 1:6; I Pt 1:4-6.

c. Those passages which speak of "Christians" falling away and being lost have reference to mere "professors," not true "possessors," of the faith.
 

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
Hi dudley,

Yes, we all know that brethren who profess the faith may often turn out to be false professors. The question is, are these people who embrace the above-mentioned errors be considered brothers in Christ in the first place? In a way, are they even "professing the faith" with their holding on to the errors of charismatism, Arminianism and worldliness?
 

Bern

Puritan Board Freshman
Jason: I struggle occasionally with this issue too. Its not something that keeps me awake at night, but I do often wonder if certain groups of people who most would consider to be Christians are in fact unregenerate. A steadfast refusal to separate from the things of the world, and an unhealthy obsession with "atmospheric" or entertaining worship are indicators that these people are lost. When I was younger I attended a Hillsong conference in London with a friend of mine who went to that "church". All it consists of is motivational speaking made to look religious. There's no biblical teaching, no scaraments.... only hype, materialism and emotionalism. What they preach is indeed another gospel (and its barely that), and their Jesus is not my Jesus nor my God. It is all man centered and it makes me sick. One of the reasons I had to leave my last church (among many) is that they wanted the worship times to go down this route (although far from the excess of Hillsong).

I know why you struggle with this issue because we probably all know nice people in these congregations, who, in some respects put us to shame with their knowledge of scripture, with their apparent love for the brethren and other good Christian traits. At the end of the day though, we don't know their hearts intentions and motives, only God does. I'm thankful to God in the highest degree that he pulled me out of all that type of "Christianity" where there are only two types of existence that keep a person going in their "walk with God"..... either emotional man centered nonsense, or fear of losing your salvation. One is popular because it is catering to mans sinful desires, and In my humble opinion, unless God intervenes in their lives, people that go along with the former are lost. People in the second category for the most part probably are saved, but they desperately need God's mercy to rescue them from believing lies about God and about His ways.

Unfortunately my life has been filled with many difficulties in this area, so I speak from experience. All glory to God for saving me from it.
 

buggy

Puritan Board Freshman
Hi Jason! Singaporean, eh? You're not alone - there's at least a few more of us here. :)

As a person who participates in a varsity fellowship group, I encounter evangelicals of all kinds, mostly of the broad-evangelical sort. With regards to how to deal with Arminians etc. about doctrine, I would do this... (but you don't have to imitate me)

It is understandable that you are disturbed that there are broad-evangelicals today who do not take a serious interest in the Word of God and would prefer fellowship with the world. But let the Word of God speak itself to any "worldly" friends and also live by example. And let God do the work of conversion and conviction in these professing believers.

This is something I am trying hard to live by. Glad to have you on PB where we can all share our walk with the Lord together.
 

timmopussycat

Puritan Board Junior
One thing that may be helpful is to remember that nobody is automatically going to remain where they are now. Those who are presently in erring churches may or may not remain there and may or may not move to a better or a worse understanding of Scripture. Somebody may be presently holding incorrect doctrines who may move to a better understanding later.
 

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
timmopussycat
One thing that may be helpful is to remember that nobody is automatically going to remain where they are now. Those who are presently in erring churches may or may not remain there and may or may not move to a better or a worse understanding of Scripture. Somebody may be presently holding incorrect doctrines who may move to a better understanding later.

That is certainly true. And our duty is to preach and pray. The issues lies with the practical application of how we bring the messages across and me trying to get a proper and grasp of how narrow God's way truly is. I've read on PB before people saying that those who are Arminians will end up being glorified and will be turned into Calvinists during their process of glorification. That doesn't seem to sit well with the scriptures that I have been reading at all.

Ultimately, the question is whether they really really need to repent of these errors if they are to be saved. If they don't, then good, things don't seem as bleak as what I have been perceiving them to be over the past few days while I was reading through Jesus' parables. If they do, isn't it outright irresponsible when we start doing a John MacArthur and urge believers to stay in their Arminian churches as long as the church ministers are generally faithful? It would also be damnable for me to introduce a young believer Wayne Grudhem's systematic theology and books by John Piper. In addition, Paul Washer's stance on worship would also be considered downright heretical since he endorses Christian rap and such. How far do we take it? Were the reformers right in condemning Arminianism as outright heresy?

buggy
Hi Jason! Singaporean, eh? You're not alone - there's at least a few more of us here.

As a person who participates in a varsity fellowship group, I encounter evangelicals of all kinds, mostly of the broad-evangelical sort. With regards to how to deal with Arminians etc. about doctrine, I would do this... (but you don't have to imitate me)

It is understandable that you are disturbed that there are broad-evangelicals today who do not take a serious interest in the Word of God and would prefer fellowship with the world. But let the Word of God speak itself to any "worldly" friends and also live by example. And let God do the work of conversion and conviction in these professing believers.

This is something I am trying hard to live by. Glad to have you on PB where we can all share our walk with the Lord together

Nice to see a fellow Singapore around. :D What university group are you in? VCF or something? I'm actually pretty convicted that parachurch organizations should always have the proper backing of a local church body, lest they start misleading people much in doctrines. And I wouldn't be willing to do biblical infiltration and go into such organizations to contend for the faith from within because the bible calls for biblical separation. I have found myself attending a few of these in the past years, and basically though I go with the intention of wanting to share the reformed faith with others, the result was that I ended up compromising much and started having doubts myself about whether a Christian should really care about biblical separation (ecclesiastical and from the world), Calvinism and cessationism at all.

Having started in a charismatic church, I'm actually no longer all that disturbed by gross doctrinal errors anymore. Word-faith, neoorthodoxy, continuationism, health and wealth, and a lack of preaching on holiness, they pretty much had all of them. What is disturbing me is how my Lord has put the issue across in His parables, which seems to suggest that a whole lot of Arminians, charismatics and fringe believers all have a common destination after this life unless they repent. This disturbs me a whole lot because pretty much every believer whom I know in everyday life apart from my brothers and sisters in the bible-presbyterian churches fall into one of these categories. Holiness marks a genuine convert, but does this concept extend to doctrinal purity?
 

Peairtach

Puritan Board Doctor
None of those who believe are hearing Christ's voice perfectly, then we would have perfect faith, perfect repentance and be without sin in this life, which the Bible and the WCF deny is possible for the believer in this life.

If we weren't justified by faith through grace even the most accurate and zealous Calvinist would be going to Hell for his existing doctrinal and ethical errors and sins. There will never be a point in this life right up to the moment of death when we will be perfectly sanctified. Thank God for Christ's righteousness, which deals with all our sins, before and after conversion.

There comes a point where it is wise for a true believer in Christ to cut links with an erroneous church, both as a testimony to others and for the good of his soul:-

E.g. Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; (Rev. 18:4, ESV).

Quote from Jason
What is disturbing me is how my Lord has put the issue across in His parables, which seems to suggest that a whole lot of Arminians, charismatics and fringe believers all have a common destination after this life unless they repent

It depends whether any of these people have true, saving faith in Christ. It's impossible for someone to be infallibly sure of another professing Christian's conversion, but we can be infallibly sure of our own.

Truly saved people can sometimes be seriously in error on various points of doctrine, and can sometimes have glaring sin in their lives.

You can only point other professing Christians in the right direction and warn them of their errors. If you feel reasonably sure that someone is unconverted, speak to them about that.
 
Last edited:

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
None of those who believe are hearing Christ's voice perfectly, then we would have perfect faith, perfect repentance and be without sin in this life, which the Bible and the WCF deny is possible for the believer in this life.

If we weren't justified by faith through grace even the most accurate and zealous Calvinist would be going to Hell for his existing doctrinal and ethical errors and sins. There will never be a point in this life right up to the moment of death when we will be perfectly sanctified. Thank God for Christ's righteousness, which deals with all our sins, before and after conversion.

There comes a point where it is wise for a true believer in Christ to cut links with an erroneous church, both as a testimony to others and for the good of his soul:-

E.g. Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; (Rev. 18:4, ESV).

Quote from Jason
What is disturbing me is how my Lord has put the issue across in His parables, which seems to suggest that a whole lot of Arminians, charismatics and fringe believers all have a common destination after this life unless they repent

It depends whether any of these people have true, saving faith in Christ. It's impossible for someone to be infallibly sure of another professing Christian's conversion, but we can be infallibly sure of our own.

Truly saved people can sometimes be seriously in error on various points of doctrine, and can sometimes have glaring sin in their lives.

You can only point other professing Christians in the right direction and warn them of their errors. If you feel reasonably sure that someone is unconverted, speak to them about that.

Thanks Richard, that does help immensely. Yes I do agree that true saving faith that ultimately what causes us to have Christ's imputation of righteousness. But that still doesn't give me a good understanding of what is acceptable doctrinal impurity and what is outright defiance of scriptures. I don't quite agree with what you are saying regarding Rev 18:4 though. It is not merely for a good testimony and the good for our souls, but we would be going against a commandment of God if we do not. Therefore, it is needful for us to know what are the errors that we must separate from, lest we be partaking in the sins of the erroneous church.

My view of repentance is actually quite closely aligned to the "Lordship Salvationists", though I do believe that faith and repentance are necessarily distinct. Repentance is the flipside of faith and stems forth out of regeneration in the same way faith does, but it is not a fruit of faith as some assert. Just as how faith can be weak, repentance can be imperfect. We all generally have a good sense of what weak faith is like, but what is imperfect repentance? In terms of holiness in our lifestyles, I have been persuaded by the puritans that genuine repentance hates all things of the world, even if we fall into them. Therefore, those with closet sins, like loving rock concerts and loving p0rnography, and never ever see the need to repent of them will never see the Kingdom of God. This is, of course, different from falling into the temptations of watching rock concerts and watching p0rnography occasionally. However, the war between the flesh and the new man must be there. Imperfect repentance is when we keep falling into them, while fake repentance is when we revel in such things.

This leaves me in a quandry with regard to doctrines. What exactly is imperfect repentance in doctrines? Where do we draw the line, and who can ever know for sure? Those who undermine resurrection and the deity of Christ were condemned by scriptures directly, so we have no issue knowing the fates of unrepentant false teachers described in the bible. Where is the line for doctrines of today? It's not as though we do not need the line. If Paul called for separation from these false teachers and prophets, then we equally need to separate ourselves from them. What is really really bad, and what is acceptable doctrinal impurity? If I pull the line towards myself, then I'll end up like certain extremists like the Outside The Camp people who think that ALL others who do not think like them will end up in hell. If I push it away from myself, then even people like John Wimber and Brian Houston should be accepted as true teachers since they do preach something that does resemble the gospel very much, even if everything else seems kind of off. Christ's parable is applicable to subshepherds as well apart from Himself, so when we apply it to this local church level, the shepherds are the church leaders and the false teachers are the strangers. Therefore, if Christ says that His elect is not going to follow strangers, and since He says what He means and means what he says, we need to have a good grasp of who are the strangers so as to warn the elect who are suffering in their churches. Who exactly are the strangers then? Is John Wesley one? John Sung? John Piper? Martin Llyod-Jones?

I understand that what I'm asking probably touches a raw nerves with many and I've seen the heated discussions on PB regarding whether someone like John Wesley is indeed a false teacher. However, I really really need an answer as it's been causing me so much unrest. If there are any pastors or elders out there who can provide me with some answers based on exegeted scriptures, it would be much appreciated.
 

Peairtach

Puritan Board Doctor
God Himself will decide who has or has not saving faith and who will therefore go to Hell.

Re doctrines and ethics, clearly some doctrines and behaviour are more central than others.

E.g. those who espouse Liberal or Roman Catholic theology are in more serious error than evangelicals who are not Reformed, although I agree that there's much that uses the term "evangelical" today that is Liberal or heteredox e.g. annihiliationism, open theology.

Those Reformed who use an organ and hymns and are credobaptists are in error in a particular way with regard to worship, but some of them may be more sanctified than some of us who do not use an organ and hymns and are paedobaptists.

We should be careful not to get into a mode of looking down our noses at other professing Christians and consigning them to Hell for the least infraction of Reformed orthodoxy, when we all have things in our hearts and lives that should cause us concern.

Sometimes if that attitude is developed of pedantic nitpicking, and I'm not saying you have it Jason, our eyes are on other Christians and their errors, and not on our own errors and on Christ.
 

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
God Himself will decide who has or has not saving faith and who will therefore go to Hell.

Re doctrines and ethics, clearly some doctrines and behaviour are more central than others.

E.g. those who espouse Liberal or Roman Catholic theology are in more serious error than evangelicals who are not Reformed, although I agree that there's much that uses the term "evangelical" today that is Liberal or heteredox e.g. annihiliationism, open theology.

Those Reformed who use an organ and hymns and are credobaptists are in error in a particular way with regard to worship, but some of them may be more sanctified than some of us who do not use an organ and hymns and are paedobaptists.

We should be careful not to get into a mode of looking down our noses at other professing Christians and consigning them to Hell for the least infraction of Reformed orthodoxy, when we all have things in our hearts and lives that should cause us concern.

Sometimes if that attitude is developed of pedantic nitpicking, and I'm not saying you have it Jason, our eyes are on other Christians and their errors, and not on our own errors and on Christ.

Hi Richard,

I get what you are saying and what you have said is pretty much what I get every single time when I tell my friends that as children of God they really should quit movies and rock concerts. After I have cast out the beam in my eyes and repented of my own transgressions, is it not time for me to help my brethren see the motes in theirs? My heart is crying for them to separate from worldliness and fully embrace Christ and reformed orthodoxy.

It is never up to us to definitively determine who are regenerate, though it is possible to be pretty sure about it for some people as shown in John's second epistle. This is different from the elect. The regenerate are part of the elect, but the elect are not necessarily yet regenerate. The flipside is that we also do not know who the the non-elect and God is the only one to pronounce final judgment upon them, but we are all pretty sure that a false teacher like Benny Hinn is at this point not regenerate unless he repents, are we not? Of course, we don't go around picking out every single church member whom we think is not holy enough and start telling them that they will go to hell if they die today, but we get all members in the church to constantly examine ourselves and check whether we are in the faith by looking at the marks of grace.

But that doesn't solve the issue of what stance we take on Arminianism, charismatism and worldly seeker-friendly churches. Are their teachers our friends, or enemies of the faith? Should all children of God separate themselves from such just as how they should stop indulging in p0rnography (I always turn to this as I haven't yet seen or heard anyone Reformed say that this is alright)?

"Re doctrines and ethics, clearly some doctrines and behaviour are more central than others." Well, this is the crux of the problem isn't it? And I really wish that we can have some who are really well-versed in the scriptures to start expound from scriptures what doctrines are central and what are not. Methinks it's horribly presumptuous to just assume that Arminianism, continuationism and seeker-friendliness are merely minor infractions from the reformed faith.

Majority of us on PB agree that there are good cases to be made from scriptures from different sides regarding EP vs hymnal worship, the three millenial views, modes of baptism, paedo vs credobaptism, textual traditions (I take a strictly textus receptus-only position which most don't subscribe to but I don't have enough scriptural basis to say that ESV users are heretical).

However, what about Arminianism, continuationism and seeker-friendliness? "All who have ears, let them hear"! Why the open defiance to scriptures? I desire strong scriptural basis to determine whether such errors are indeed less serious that what we usually call heresies (open theism, universalism, denial of the miracles of Christ of the fundamentals such as the virgin birth, original sin, inerrancy of scriptures, substitutionary atonement, deity of Christ and bodily resurrection of Christ). Even then, I meet many who say that even such heresies are not damnable! What is damnable and what is not? At what point are our doctrines deviant enough for our gospel to be call "another gospel"?

What are central and what are not? Arminianism seems serious since it undermine's God's saving grace; continuationism seems serious since it undermine God's revealed will; and seeker-friendliness seems serious since it undermines original sin and exalts the world. Are there definitive answers from scriptures for us to know what are heresies and what are not? I have so many friends who are worshipping in Hillsongs church which is Arminian, charismatic and seeker-friendly (plus a does of prosperity preaching).

If such errors are not serious, then perhaps they should just stay in there and try to grow in their faith there? After all "they preach the gospel", regardless of how diluted it is. Or should we "ernestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints (Jude 3)" and warn others that Brian Houston is a false teacher? Or is he actually a good shepherd who is not accurately speaking forth God's voice? The reformed people I speak to generally refer to him as a false teacher, but then start saying that John Piper, Jack Deere and Martin Llyod-Jones are generally okay. Is that double-speak? Where do we draw the line?
 

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
We're Calvinists, we believe people are saved by God's electing, irresistible grace, not by doctrinal knowledge.

Absolutely. And we are also compelled by scriptures to turn away from those in error and practise biblical separation. That's the issue, not whether anyone is saved by doctrinal knowledge.
 

jayce475

Puritan Board Freshman
I am starting to see and embrace how judging anyone's salvation at all is going beyond scriptures as 1 Cor 4:5 says, "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God." If God could save Manasseh and cause him to repent, God can save any heretic. On the other hand, if there is anyone out there who is able to shed some light on the seriousness of the errors of Arminianism, continuationism and easy-believerism (rock concert worships, Christianity-lite preaching with slight focus on prosperity), as to whether they in any way compromise the integrity of the Lord Jesus Christ, the veracity of God's Word, and the truthfulness of the Gospel, it'll be great.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top