Preaching to the Choir

[Josheb]

Having perused the ops in this board, I noticed a few threads in which either the op or a post within a thread asserted (explicitly or implicitly) the position asserted was necessary for salvation. There is, for example, an op right here on the top page of this board titled, "Warning: Turn or Burn," (in ALL CAPS) that implies a lack of agreement with that opening post will result in judgment and burning in hell. Since eschatology is Christian doctrine, one being discussed by Christians in this Christian board in this Christian forum, I wonder for whom this op's admonition is intended. Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

 

[miamited]

Hi Josheb

Well, I would say that keeping in mind Jesus' admonition to those aligned with the fellowship of believers will apparently not all be saved because of some error in their beliefs, that preaching to the choir isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Jesus tells us that a day is coming when this will happen:
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Now, as I understand the descriptors here, he is speaking of those aligned with his church. After all, what other group of people do such things in Jesus' name. Muslims? Atheists? Buddhists? Hindis? I'm confident that he is warning those who are, in their lives, aligned with his church in some way, that they don't have the right understanding or relationship that the Scriptures ask of believers.

So, some warnings among the fellowship would likely be a good thing.

 

[miamited]

I would further say that many of Paul's writings are a warning to how those that were, even in his day, aligned with the fellowship might need to stop and examine themselves and their faith. For example, Paul's admonition to the body that was allowing a man who had his father's wife, to expel him from among their fellowship. He was talking to a body of believers in that warning to them.

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

Having perused the ops in this board, I noticed a few threads in which either the op or a post within a thread asserted (explicitly or implicitly) the position asserted was necessary for salvation. There is, for example, an op right here on the top page of this board titled, "Warning: Turn or Burn," (in ALL CAPS) that implies a lack of agreement with that opening post will result in judgment and burning in hell. Since eschatology is Christian doctrine, one being discussed by Christians in this Christian board in this Christian forum, I wonder for whom this op's admonition is intended. Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

Those are interesting observations and questions. I would first say it is not completely discernable which particular ones among us who self-identify as Christians are actually saved. But it seems safe to assume some may not be. So preaching to the choir is not all bad. But I do agree with you that it is presumptuous for anyone to say, "Believe as I do or perish".

What is the best way to deal with those posts? I generally ignore the ones I am not interested in. On rare occasions I will discover through dialogue that some people's doctrines are so offensive that I will "ignore" them. Even then, I do not consider myself as qualified to pass judgement on their salvation. To me, that is God's alone to decide.

 

[Josheb]

Hi Josheb

Well, I would say that keeping in mind Jesus' admonition to those aligned with the fellowship of believers will apparently not all be saved because of some error in their beliefs, that preaching to the choir isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Got a tangible example of that? If there's a fatal error in their beliefs, then they're not part of the "choir."

Jesus tells us that a day is coming when this will happen:
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Yes, and Jesus explicitly states he did not know any of those people. They think they are Christians, but they are not Christians. As Paul put it, they neither know or are known. Who, exactly, would that be in this board?

Now, as I understand the descriptors here, he is speaking of those aligned with his church. After all, what other group of people do such things in Jesus' name. Muslims? Atheists? Buddhists? Hindis? I'm confident that he is warning those who are, in their lives, aligned with his church in some way, that they don't have the right understanding or relationship that the Scriptures ask of believers.

So, some warnings among the fellowship would likely be a good thing.

All those other groups are outside the scope of this specific inquiry. This op stipulates the choir, those who are actually Christians. This board has 75 ops in it. Which of them was written to non-Christians?

 

[Josheb]

Those are interesting observations and questions. I would first say it is not completely discernable which particular ones among us who self-identify as Christians are actually saved. But it seems safe to assume some may not be.

Evidence from the board for that position?

Seriously, as I just asked miamited, there are 75 pages worth of ops in this board. Which one of them was written non-Christians? Which non-Christian here has an interest in Christian eschatology?

 

[miamited]

Got a tangible example of that? If there's a fatal error in their beliefs, then they're not part of the "choir."

Oooh, so you're going to tell us that if anyone is a part of those people that Jesus spoke of, then they aren't a part of the fellowship of believers. Got it. Well no, if all we're going to consider are born again believers, that's going to really be hard to know about someone else. For example: How do any of us know that you are a born again believer? Can you prove it in this medium?

 

[Josheb]

Oooh, so you're going to tell us that if anyone is a part of those people that Jesus spoke of, then they aren't a part of the fellowship of believers. Got it. Well no, if all we're going to consider are born again believers, that's going to really be hard to know about someone else. For example: How do any of us know that you are a born again believer? Can you prove it in this medium?

Ugh!

You did not think that through, did you? I am taking the exact opposite position you just described.


IF it is assumed everyone in the Christian forum in the Christian board discussing Christian end times is a Christian then it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to tell the Christians they are going to go to hell if they don't believe or do X, Y, or Z in an end times op. It's just stupid. If the op is being read by Christians, then the op is necessarily and inescapably preaching to the proverbial choir. It must be assumed there are non-Christians who do not believe the post if there's going to be a reader going to hell. If that is the assumption, then the author of any such op has presumed to judge the reader(s) as non-Christian AND that non-Christian reading a Christian op in a Christian board in a Christian forum with an interest in Christian eschatology. Both options are irrational. On top of either of those two irrationalities, there is the problem of salvation by grace through faith. A Christian is, by definition, someone who is already saved. To even remotely suggest their eternal salvation from sin is dependent upon agreeing with an end times op is ludicrous.

If you, miamited, are going to assert there are non-Christians in this Christian board reading Christian-authored ops about Christian eschatology then I would simply like you to point out to me one of those non-Christians. Otherwise, the default setting is that this board's ops are being read by Christians and preaching threats of hell to Christians is bad form at best; depraved and devilish works of the flesh void of any Spiritual truth, veracity, and efficacy at worst.


I will, therefore, repeat my original inquiries for you and everyone else to consider.


Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

 

[Free]

Ugh!

You did not think that through, did you? I am taking the exact opposite position you just described.


IF it is assumed everyone in the Christian forum in the Christian board discussing Christian end times is a Christian then it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to tell the Christians they are going to go to hell if they don't believe or do X, Y, or Z in an end times op. It's just stupid. If the op is being read by Christians, then the op is necessarily and inescapably preaching to the proverbial choir. It must be assumed there are non-Christians who do not believe the post if there's going to be a reader going to hell. If that is the assumption, then the author of any such op has presumed to judge the reader(s) as non-Christian AND that non-Christian reading a Christian op in a Christian board in a Christian forum with an interest in Christian eschatology. Both options are irrational. On top of either of those two irrationalities, there is the problem of salvation by grace through faith. A Christian is, by definition, someone who is already saved. To even remotely suggest their eternal salvation from sin is dependent upon agreeing with an end times op is ludicrous.

If you, miamited, are going to assert there are non-Christians in this Christian board reading Christian-authored ops about Christian eschatology then I would simply like you to point out to me one of those non-Christians. Otherwise, the default setting is that this board's ops are being read by Christians and preaching threats of hell to Christians is bad form at best; depraved and devilish works of the flesh void of any Spiritual truth, veracity, and efficacy at worst.

Have you not already answered your own question by stating: "Yes, and Jesus explicitly states he did not know any of those people. They think they are Christians, but they are not Christians. As Paul put it, they neither know or are known."? Are those not the non-Christians that miamited is referring to?

How can anyone on these forums know for certain who are those who claim to be Christian and actually believes themselves to be, but isn't really?

I will, therefore, repeat my original inquiries for you and everyone else to consider.

I will, therefore, repeat my original inquiries for you and everyone else to consider.


Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

No one can answer the motivation behind what someone else posts if that motivation isn't clear. But, I think you might be reading too much into it and in what forum it was posted.

 

[Josheb]

No one can answer the motivation behind what someone else posts......

Can you answer the questions asked in this op?

Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a Christian preach to other Christians and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does that practice make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?


Take them one at a time. Succinct answers to the questions asked will be appreciated. Please do not further waste my time, or yours, or further obstruct the thread if you're not going to answer those questions.

 

[miamited]

Ugh!

You did not think that through, did you? I am taking the exact opposite position you just described.


IF it is assumed everyone in the Christian forum in the Christian board discussing Christian end times is a Christian then it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to tell the Christians they are going to go to hell if they don't believe or do X, Y, or Z in an end times op. It's just stupid. If the op is being read by Christians, then the op is necessarily and inescapably preaching to the proverbial choir. It must be assumed there are non-Christians who do not believe the post if there's going to be a reader going to hell. If that is the assumption, then the author of any such op has presumed to judge the reader(s) as non-Christian AND that non-Christian reading a Christian op in a Christian board in a Christian forum with an interest in Christian eschatology. Both options are irrational. On top of either of those two irrationalities, there is the problem of salvation by grace through faith. A Christian is, by definition, someone who is already saved. To even remotely suggest their eternal salvation from sin is dependent upon agreeing with an end times op is ludicrous.

If you, miamited, are going to assert there are non-Christians in this Christian board reading Christian-authored ops about Christian eschatology then I would simply like you to point out to me one of those non-Christians. Otherwise, the default setting is that this board's ops are being read by Christians and preaching threats of hell to Christians is bad form at best; depraved and devilish works of the flesh void of any Spiritual truth, veracity, and efficacy at worst.


I will, therefore, repeat my original inquiries for you and everyone else to consider.


Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

Hey Josheb

Ok, well I'll go with you believe that what you're saying is the truth and let it go at that.

 

[Free]

Can you answer the questions asked in this op?

Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a Christian preach to other Christians and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does that practice make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?


Take them one at a time. Succinct answers to the questions asked will be appreciated. Please do not further waste my time, or yours, or further obstruct the thread if you're not going to answer those questions.

No, I can't answer the questions, because, again, I do not know someone else's motive for posting what they have, unless they specifically state why. You're making a number of (at this point) unwarranted assumptions. You have to go back to that OP and ask them what they meant by what they posted and to whom they were posting. Only that person can give answers to your questions.

Maybe they chose this particular forum for no specific reason, but maybe because it's about an unbeliever's final destination, to post something to unbelievers in general that they felt burdened to share. Don't read so much into it unless intentions have been made clear.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Having perused the ops in this board, I noticed a few threads in which either the op or a post within a thread asserted (explicitly or implicitly) the position asserted was necessary for salvation. There is, for example, an op right here on the top page of this board titled, "Warning: Turn or Burn," (in ALL CAPS) that implies a lack of agreement with that opening post will result in judgment and burning in hell. Since eschatology is Christian doctrine, one being discussed by Christians in this Christian board in this Christian forum, I wonder for whom this op's admonition is intended. Since salvation is by grace through faith and NOT by eschatology, how is it one Christian can even remotely imply his siblings in the body of Christ might burn if there is any disagreement with that op?

• How can a member of the proverbial "choir" preach to the choir and threaten them with divine judgment culminating with their burning in hell?
• Does this make sense to anyone?
• Is this practice something anyone here thinks should be ignored?

What is the better, more whole-scripture alternative?

Do you think it hurts to hear again a warning message, although it has already been received ?
Paul reiterated warnings multiple times, to churches he had already visited.

Personally, I don't think we can hear the warnings too many times.