Was ____________ a Christian?

[Theognome]

The recent Tolkien thread brought this up yet again. When, if ever, is it reasonable, allowable or even profitable to attempt to make such a judgment?

In my view, the statement, "This person was never saved" poses a problem- do we know the heart of a person at the moment the Lord chose to complete said persons life? Scripture clearly declares otherwise- we don't even know our own hearts as we ought, much less anyone elses. Also, we are in no position to declare God's secret will, either.

An argument can be made that there are some guidelines in determining whether a person's work on earth was merely chaff. For starters, there are people who openly declare hostility towards God to their last days. Stating that such a person did not live as a Christian is not unreasonable; though we cannot definitively state that they did not die as one. For those persons that declare themselves a Christian of one sort or another, we have the government of our Church and the confessions therein to turn to.

Historic councils of Godly men have determined some groups as being outside the pale of Biblical Orthodoxy to the extent that such groups do no teach true Christianity at it's most fundamental roots. Examples of such are the Roman Catholic Church, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses. Although someone in any of these organizations (or any other judged as vile) may be Christian, membership in these groups does not preclude the assumption of true belief. In such cases, their fruit can be judged in regards to whether it reflected true faith, but again, the same admonition as to declaring whether they died in their sin is in place. We can only see how someone lived, not how they perished.

Where the elders our our respective Churches have not made denominational declarations, we must assume that a person declaring themselves a Christian is indeed a true believer. If their walk with the Lord is rife with unrepentant sin, then we must ask if they were rebuked, corrected or disciplined for this? If they still live, would we be willing to make a rebuke or exhortation if needed? And, despite various doctrinal errors (since every person on this board has them) does said person deny the most fundamental tenets of true Faith?

Note that in all three cases, the only judgment that can be made is whether a person lived for Christ in what is known about the persons life. In no case can anyone, without proper ecclesiastical authority and process, declare someone dead in their sins.

Theognome

 

[Contra_Mundum]

It seems to me the real time when this question is raised is when a person claims to be a Christian. A person who does not claim to be a Christian--I don't think there's any real right we have to suppose they were one. Jesus said, deny me before men and I'll deny you before my Father.

On the other hand, what if someone was praying for them right up til they died? Do they not have the right to hope that Christ made himself apprehensible to them at death's door? It may be unlikely, but should you cut off their hope in prayer by saying, this person we never knew acknowledged Christ in life; therefore abandon hope for his soul? I would rather err in silence.

What of other's lives lived in apostate churches? A more difficult question, and one which we should reserve most public judgment, I should think. At best we would appear pointlessly censorious. If men will follow another man in preference to Christ himself, then following Calvin is no surer a sign of Christian faith than following the Pope.

 

[Kevin]

Thanks Bill. I call this the "judgment of charity".

In other words, I might (do) say of some individual " in the judgment of charity I call him brother". However, I must confess that many of those that are in this catagory are the objects of repeated gospel presentations...

 

[Wannabee]

There is a pendulum swing here that we must avoid. On the one hand, there is a very real sense in which we cannot judge a person's heart clearly. We must be charitable. We must believe all things. But that doesn't mean that we're to be ignorant (brethren). Case in point would be Hannah. She was crying out to God and Eli thought her to be drunk. In reality, she was more righteous than he.
On the other hand, we are commanded to judge one another. We don't judge the world for that is left to Christ. We do judge one another though, on the basis of what Christ has commanded us. We know that what is in the heart pours forth in one's speech. We are not to be associated with sons of disobedience, for to do so is to partake of their wrath. How can we know these things and yet not judge whether or not one is a Christian? Church discipline is just that - making the judgment of whether or not someone is saved, according to biblical dictate. When we cast them out we take them out from under the judgment of the church and leave them to be judged with the world by Christ.
Well, I ramble. Hopefully we will be cautions, responsible and discerning in regard to this.

Blessings

 

[Sven]

Theognome,

You have, I think, inadvertantly brought up a point that needs to be brought up, vis., the fact that Christians (especially American Christians) need to stop with the practice of private judgment. Not only do Christians have a bad habit of making their own understanding of Scripture as the ultimate interpretation, they also make their own experience or feeling the supreme judge in ecclesiastical matters.

Christians are members of the Church; this means that all private judgment must be in submission to the Church. Christians need to read their Bibles in submission to the Church's interpretation. Christians also need to submit to the Church's judgment in ecclesiastical matters. Sounds Romish? Not at all. This is the teaching and practice of the Reformed Church. The difference between Romish and Reformed is that, for the Romish Church the Church precedes the Word of God, and therefore is the ultimate judge in all matters of faith and practice, but for the Reformed, the Word of God precedes the Church and is therefore the ultimate judge. This does not discount the fact, though, that the Church has authority to make judgments on the meaning of the Word of God and on ecclesiastical matters. It clearly does in Acts 15 and Matt. 18. This also doesn't discount the fact that the Church can be wrong in these matters and that an individual can challenge the Church. However, it is not the business of the individual to make judgments on the interpretation of the Word of God and on ecclesiastical matters. Individuals must be willing to submit to the Church's ruling on both, unless it can be clearly proved from Scripture that the Church is wrong.