I hadn't planned to post anymore questions on this site. However, I find I have so many questions, especially when conversing with other bloggers on other sites, that I have decided to post another blogger's statement to me and ask some questions and allow him to answer. The following is comments to his and my posts on Brad Reynold's site http://guardian-ministries.blogspot.com
PTL and I were dialoging regarding to Holiness and I think we may have gotten on a rabbit trail. But I like the trail and want to follow it a way. Feel free to jump in if you so choose. Just BE NICE.
PTL's Response to my questions:
posttinebraelux said... Selah, Regarding Brad's original blog, I disagree strongly with the inplication that alcohol in moderation is sin and I disagree with him using that 'vice' to point to a general 'slipping away' of holiness in Christians' lives. Other than that, I agree with the 'gist' of his blog. Hope that helps.To our discussion, I most certainly agree that Paul often exhorts Christians to, in effect, 'walk worthy of the calling with which they were/are called.' Inherent in that statement is the implication that it is possible for Christians to walk 'unworthily' of their calling - i.e. be 'worldly'. I personally don't believe that Christians can be 'in the flesh' based on Rom. 8, but that's probably a semantic issue more often than not. Hence, I agree with your post. :) I would not be surprised, however, if, when we get to heaven, we find that many who we thought were 'worldly' Christians were/are, in fact, not Christians at all. I think it imperative to exhort Christians to be holy. I think it just as imperative, though, to emphatically state that, if there is no fruit, there is no attachment to the Vine. :) There is no such thing as a non-fruit bearing Christian and people need desperately to hear that.So, again, I agree wholeheartedly with your response. :) Have a blessed evening sister,PTL 11/27/2006 6:40 PM
SelahV's response to PTL:
I'm gonna take some liberties here since our host has moved on to another topic. Usually, few readers return to comment, so I'd like to address some of the things you said to me in your last comment.
You said, "I would not be surprised, however, if, when we get to heaven, we find that many who we thought were 'worldly' Christians were/are, in fact, not Christians at all." Do you think when we get to Heaven that we will actually remember anyone who didn't get to heaven with us? I guess if we do remember, then we won't care, will we? I mean, since there is no sorrow in heaven.
ALSO:You said: "I think it imperative to exhort Christians to be holy." Why? Why is it important that Christians be holy?
ALSO, you said: "I think it just as imperative, though, to emphatically state that, if there is no fruit, there is no attachment to the Vine. :) There is no such thing as a non-fruit bearing Christian and people need desperately to hear that."
According to what I think Calvinists adhere to, all the "elect" are going to go to heaven. So how can an elect person not bear fruit? It would indeed be impossible to bear fruit without attachment to the Vine. There are no branches if there is no Vine. So fruit can't come from nothing. And since Jesus referred to Christians as branches, anything but a branch connected to the Vine would not produce anything, right? My tomato Vines have suckers and suckers don't produce fruit. I don't think Jesus meant those suckers as branches, do you? And if it is true that branches are Christians, and Christians are elect, then all branches produce fruit, don't they? Even if the fruit isn't visible to the harvester?
I've had some Christians in my life who have insisted that some other person is not a Christian because they did not see any fruit. But just because one person doesn't see any fruit, doesn't mean there is no fruit. Just means all people don't see all things. Which brings completeness to me in the fact that we have no right to judge others or judge them by their fruit or lack of fruit. What do you think? Tell ya what. I'm gonna post these questions and your original statement to me on one of my blogs. Question-Answer.blogspot.com. In order for me to keep up with your replies more easily than scrolling down the hundreds here on Brad's site, would you mind to come over to my house and sup awhile? selahV
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Selah,
Good idea to 'move the thread.' To your first question, 'do you think we'll care if some don't make it as there will be no sorrow in heaven?' (paraphrased) No, I don't think we'll care insofar as we will weep over those who aren't there. The statement was meant in a rhetorical manner in that, were we able to 'see' who are saved and who are not - we'd probably be surprised.
To your second question (again paraphrased), 'why do I think it important to exhort Christians to be holy?' Because we're commanded to do so. I know that sounds kind of simple, but I think that Biblical mandate is always the primary reason for doing anything. The underlying question, however, of 'why WOULD God command us to exhort each other toward practical holiness?' is much more difficult. If it is true that our sins are seperated from us as far as the east is from the west and that God truly 'remembers them no more', why is holiness so important? In my admittedly limited knowledge of things spiritual, I am under the impression that it is important because practical holiness is primarily involved with our relation to others. The fruit of the Spirit ALL have to do with how we treat others. When we develop practical holiness, we - by definition - develop Christlike treatment OF others. That's why (I believe) Christ said that it is not what goes into the body that defiles a person, but rather what proceeds from the body. And Christ said that it is exactly that practical holiness that he would use to reach the lost (i.e. the Gospel in action). Remember Paul's words in Rom. 10? How beautiful are the 'feet'....Ever wonder why he said feet and not mouths? I may be WAY off, but that's how I see it.
To your 3rd question (paraphrased), 'what do I think about your take on the Vine/branches analogy?' I believe that if someone is a Christian there WILL be fruit - albeit possibly puny and shrivelly (to carry out the analogy). And yes, we are commanded to be judges of each other (at least of Christians - we are not, however to judge non-Christians). See Mat. 7:16-20. Having said that, however, I would offer the following caveats: our judgement of others (1) is to be done only after 'we've removed the plank from our own eyes', (2) should ALWAYS be done in love for them, (3) should ALWAYS be done in a manner which encourages a response of repentance and reinstatement rather than resentment and rebellion, and (4) we are not to judge someone's justification - only their practical walk (in other words, it is not ours to determine who is saved and who is not - but rather to be accountable to each other for our 'fruit bearing').
Sorry for the long response.
Grace and peace,
PTL
PTL: Welcome to my little world, my brother. Thanks for accepting my invitation.
Two things jumped out at me in your reply:
One--you said you were "under the impression that it is important [to be holy] because practical holiness is primarily involved with our relation to others."
I agree in total with that. And if we are not holy, then the opposite is unholy. So what is unholiness?
I see unholiness as separated from Jesus unto self. And self-gratifcation, self-exaltation, self-indulgence. Isn't anything we put before Christ a self-centered unholy thing? So in fact wouldn't that be living unto the flesh?
I'll let you answer that before I move to the second question. Cause I asked a few questions regarding your point. selahV
Selah,
Absolutely. In fact, self-centeredness is the opposite of any/all of the fruit of the Spirit. I would differ semantically in that I don't think Christians can be 'in the flesh' positionally (see Rom. 8), so I prefer the term 'worldly'. Otherwise, right on.
PTL
PTL: are you familiar with any of Watchman Nee's writings? "Sit, Walk, Stand"? the whole book is based on Ephesians in which we are seated in Christ positionally, Walking with Christ positionally, and Standing Against evil in Christ positionally. selahV
PTL: you said as your 4th point: "we are not to judge someone's justification - only their practical walk (in other words, it is not ours to determine who is saved and who is not - but rather to be accountable to each other for our 'fruit bearing')".
Do you think that this is the premise from which Calvinists do not believe a salvation prayer or an invitation is necessary? selahV
Selah,
Haven't read any of Watchman Nee's works but have heard of him.
2nd - not making the connection about prayer of salvation & fruit-bearing. I did post a blog on my take of the prayer of salvation, though.
PS - I'm probably what most would call a Calvanist, but I prefer the term 'sovereigntist' as I am not too impressed by John Calvin the man - at least his willingness to hunt others down and kill them. :)
Grace sister,
PTL
Post a Comment