Are all Christians Saved?

[GraceAmbassador]

Dear Brothers and Brotheretes:

I heard a lot of misconception of the once "derogatory" term Christians on TV in the mouth of ungodly man and I have heard the same misconception from some who bear the name, or nickname, of Christians.

This prompt me to post this thread here, and if anyone cares to respond, please do so in a very simple way:

Are all Christians saved?

Let me help someone:

The Muslim believe that anyone born in America is a "Christian".
Some whites supremacists believe that anyone who is white is automatically a Christian
Some people believe that all who attend a Christian gathering is a Christian
Some Christians believe that anyone who can quote the Bible is a Christian...

Even if all the above would be true, my question still remains: Are all Christian Saved?

In the thread about When were you saved, I said that I had been a Christian since before my conception, but only experienced Salvation in January 1991. In fact, as much as I believe in Eternal Salvation, I cannot say that I had experienced Eternal Salvation until I learned a few things about God.

Is being a Christian and being SAVED the same thing? If not, why do we have such a misconception?

If not, then what is the distinction for example, from a TV personality who claims to be a Christian but lives like the devil and a unsaved person? What is the difference from TV ministers who are Christians and the SAVED people?

SHOULDN'T WE ABOLISH ALL TOGETHER THE TERM "CHRISTIAN" AND BEGIN TO REFER TO THE REAL PEOPLE OF GOD AS "THE ELECT" OR THE "SAVED ONES"??

I know that this is not a very organized thought but I believe anyone can figure out what I am saying...

Be simple and better organized when you answer, please!

DISCLAIMER: This thread has nothing to do with recent threads in this forum or events in anyone's lives. It was solely prompted by the way I referred to my own life in the thread mentioned in the above text.

Milt

[MCoving]

Dear Brothers and Brotheretes:

I heard a lot of misconception of the once "derogatory" term Christians on TV in the mouth of ungodly man and I have heard the same misconception from some who bear the name, or nickname, of Christians.

This prompt me to post this thread here, and if anyone cares to respond, please do so in a very simple way:

Are all Christians saved?

Let me help someone:

The Muslim believe that anyone born in America is a "Christian".
Some whites supremacists believe that anyone who is white is automatically a Christian
Some people believe that all who attend a Christian gathering is a Christian
Some Christians believe that anyone who can quote the Bible is a Christian...

Even if all the above would be true, my question still remains: Are all Christian Saved?

In the thread about When were you saved, I said that I had been a Christian since before my conception, but only experienced Salvation in January 1991. In fact, as much as I believe in Eternal Salvation, I cannot say that I had experienced Eternal Salvation until I learned a few things about God.

Is being a Christian and being SAVED the same thing? If not, why do we have such a misconception?

If not, then what is the distinction for example, from a TV personality who claims to be a Christian but lives like the devil and a unsaved person? What is the difference from TV ministers who are Christians and the SAVED people?

SHOULDN'T WE ABOLISH ALL TOGETHER THE TERM "CHRISTIAN" AND BEGIN TO REFER TO THE REAL PEOPLE OF GOD AS "THE ELECT" OR THE "SAVED ONES"??

I know that this is not a very organized thought but I believe anyone can figure out what I am saying...

Be simple and better organized when you answer, please!

DISCLAIMER: This thread has nothing to do with recent threads in this forum or events in anyone's lives. It was solely prompted by the way I referred to my own life in the thread mentioned in the above text.

Milt

Great thoughts Milt! Yeah it seems that the name Christian has been misused by many people, and have come to be defined in many ways. As you said some people think that just 'cause they are born in the US they are Christians. Some think that if you profress Christ and His diety you are a Christian. Many people if you tell them you are a Christian don't know what your definition of Christian is. Since this term has been so misused it is probably better to call ourselves something else. Or if we call ourselves Christian define it by the Bible.. that its one who knows the diety of Christ and His Word and believes in Him, etc.. the Gospel.

haha LOL! I love your term the "saved ones." I like to explain to people by saying I'm adopted into Gods family, and adoption has nothing to do with me! Just like adoption in the U.S.

Thanks for the thread.. I've thought of that very thing recently too as I went to my friends wedding Friday night.. she profresses to know Christ but not the Scripture.. she thinks along with some of the people in my old church that God just allows things to happen, doesn't really control everything.. isn't Soveriegn. It's hard sometimes 'cause they go about the motions as if they knew God.

Have a good day!

Mary

[Nicholas Heath]

Dear Brothers and Brotheretes:

I heard a lot of misconception of the once "derogatory" term Christians on TV in the mouth of ungodly man and I have heard the same misconception from some who bear the name, or nickname, of Christians.

This prompt me to post this thread here, and if anyone cares to respond, please do so in a very simple way:

Are all Christians saved?

Let me help someone:

The Muslim believe that anyone born in America is a "Christian".
Some whites supremacists believe that anyone who is white is automatically a Christian
Some people believe that all who attend a Christian gathering is a Christian
Some Christians believe that anyone who can quote the Bible is a Christian...

Even if all the above would be true, my question still remains: Are all Christian Saved?

In the thread about When were you saved, I said that I had been a Christian since before my conception, but only experienced Salvation in January 1991. In fact, as much as I believe in Eternal Salvation, I cannot say that I had experienced Eternal Salvation until I learned a few things about God.

Is being a Christian and being SAVED the same thing? If not, why do we have such a misconception?

If not, then what is the distinction for example, from a TV personality who claims to be a Christian but lives like the devil and a unsaved person? What is the difference from TV ministers who are Christians and the SAVED people?

SHOULDN'T WE ABOLISH ALL TOGETHER THE TERM "CHRISTIAN" AND BEGIN TO REFER TO THE REAL PEOPLE OF GOD AS "THE ELECT" OR THE "SAVED ONES"??

I know that this is not a very organized thought but I believe anyone can figure out what I am saying...

Be simple and better organized when you answer, please!

DISCLAIMER: This thread has nothing to do with recent threads in this forum or events in anyone's lives. It was solely prompted by the way I referred to my own life in the thread mentioned in the above text.

Milt

Yes, all Christians are saved, other wise they would not be christians . I would say that many professing Christians are in fact not christians. Mainstream Christianity is not christianity, at all . My thoughts, is that a true Christian will be Christ like . How does one become Christ like ? Good works, have a warm smile, be like mother theresa ? I would say no ! To be Christ like, is to be like Christ, right? To be acceptable before God we must have perfect righteousness, and we get that through the imputed righteousness of Christ, therefore thats when we are like Christ. In addition we need our sins to be atoned for, so that is why we have the blood. So what I am getting at is, a christian believes that the imputed righteousness and atoning work of Christ is sufficient . The problem occurs when professing Christians do not believe that, so we have non christians carrying a christian name . So my question would be, could one trust in the imputed righteousnees of Christ, and the atoning work, confess the absolute sovereignty of God, believe in election, ect. and not be a Christian ? Could one be so decieved, and have all the "right doctrine", but yet be lost ? (not to avoid good works, I know God created us for them, but what makes us Christian is what I was getting at)

Milt, I hope you do not mind all the faces, just want you to feel like we are talking face to face , and not just over the computer....lol....

[GraceAmbassador]

Does one need to be a Christian to be saved? Do all saved people profess the name of Christian? Where in the Bible it says that we became Christians after we were saved or that because we are Christians we are saved?

The total over-generalization of this term has so many deceptions and dilution, dissolution, of what and who the saved one is that anyone can say "I am saved because I am a Christian; or I am Christian therefore I am saved".

Paul says that "the things that he desired not to do, those things he did; but not the things he desired to do". Then he declares: "Oh wretched man I am; who will deliver me from this body of death" (Referring to the custom of the Romans of tying the murdered persons body to the body of the murderer until the decaying and putrefying body of the dead person would consume to death the body of the murderer). Isn't this predisposition of recognizing one's misery and deadness without mincing words, excuses, half-truths and flagging religious badges, one of the characteristic of the "saved one", in juxtaposition to that of one who calls himself a "christian" but who does not display any of this character?

When I was an Arminian preacher (I will not post my testimony again), all I could do was to demonstrate my above-the-average Bible knowledge when confronted with my sin and twisting of God's Word. I did not possess the character demonstrated by Paul in the scripture paraphrased above.
When David was confronted with His sin, he did not flash his warrior résumé in front of God. He shouted: I SINNED AGAINST MY LORD and faced the shame of his sin publicly.

In another occasion Paul calls himself "a pharisee of the pharisees" which meant that Paul kept the "law" very well and behaved in a above reproach manner; however he still refers to himself as the chief sinner. So, although his "works" were GOOD and commendable, he still felt as "the chief sinner". He did not say, "well, since we have Grace and forgiveness, I will continue to act sinfully and if I get caught I will repent and be sorry for being caught but no one will pay attention as to how often I sinned before I got caught..." (This paragraph is a bit of my experience working with TV preachers and this has nothing to do with any person in the Forum living or dead; any similarity is mere coincidence.)

I have been giving these hints, biblical hints, to demonstrate that none of our concepts of "what is a christian" is in line with the word of God. There is a heavy weight of evidence that most of what we called "christian" is not SAVED at all... The fact that I did not consider myself saved before I learned Sovereign Grace was not because I was an Arminian. Being an Arminian; it was because by being and Arminian I believed that my behavior could be mitigated by other "good things that I did" and the "things that I did for God's work". But I was not demonstrating the contrite spirit that Paul and David demonstrated.

The same error above I find in Sovereign Grace circles and Internet discussion, out of many, Thank God, I have rid myself: They say: Well, perhaps my biblical consistency with God's Sovereignty and my knowledge of God as a Sovereign God and my REJECTION of Arminianism will attenuate my error, it will perhaps appease God, assuage His wrath against me for sinning; and since I know that I have already been forgiven, why have a contrite heart. After all God is Sovereign and He knows that I was going to sin ANYWAY; if He did not delivered me from sinning and if He is omniscient, and omnipresent, then He forgave me beforehand...

Think this does not happen and people do not think that way? Frequent some INTERNET Forum and find out what some immature people are saying and how they deal with their deliberate sinful behavior... It may not be with so many words, but people justify all kinds of bad, sometimes really bad behaviors, by throwing smoke screens of not being Arminians... That's why I left PalTalk rooms and abandoned some relationships that I acquired in Internet Forums, that later became liabilities.

I just want to know: what makes a "christian" a real saved one. What is the difference between a Christian and a saved person...

Milt

[rlhuckle]

Are all Christians saved?

Scripture is clear; all who claim the label are not saved--only those whom God claims are saved.

In the thread about When were you saved, I said that I had been a Christian since before my conception, but only experienced Salvation in January 1991. In fact, as much as I believe in Eternal Salvation, I cannot say that I had experienced Eternal Salvation until I learned a few things about God.

I can identify with this statement. I used to look back to an adolescent time when I prayed a 'sinners' prayer and then promptly fell into worldliness and sin. I cannot rightly pinpoint a definite point in time that I became aware of God's placing me in Christ--the revelation has been progressive and I am still trying to work it out with much fear and trembling. Psalm 22 has been a great comfort to me today. Maybe that means I haven't 'experienced' salvation yet-- some people that I know seem to think so.

SHOULDN'T WE ABOLISH ALL TOGETHER THE TERM "CHRISTIAN" AND BEGIN TO REFER TO THE REAL PEOPLE OF GOD AS "THE ELECT" OR THE "SAVED ONES"??

I'm all for it. I just had a discussion yesterday with someone who claimed the two of us worship the same God yet believes God never sends anybody to hell (especially infants). I guess he believes that men send themselves there of their own accord by their failing to accept and receive Christ. He was dumbfounded that I said that his 'opinion' was unscriptural and that if we could insure our infants' salvation by aborting or killing them, then we should. Needless to say, he got offended. Do we worship the same God?

(that's a rhetorical question--no need to answer; it is along the same line as Milt's)

Phi 3:8-11 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

[MCoving]

.

The same error above I find in Sovereign Grace circles and Internet discussion, out of many, Thank God, I have rid myself: They say: Well, perhaps my biblical consistency with God's Sovereignty and my knowledge of God as a Sovereign God and my REJECTION of Arminianism will attenuate my error, it will perhaps appease God, assuage His wrath against me for sinning; and since I know that I have already been forgiven, why have a contrite heart. After all God is Sovereign and He knows that I was going to sin ANYWAY; if He did not delivered me from sinning and if He is omniscient, and

I just want to know: what makes a "christian" a real saved one. What is the difference between a Christian and a saved person...

Milt

It is interesting that some people over the internet who discuss things wouldn't have a contrite heart. That is what the Lord requires of us.. to repent and change.. to bring our thoughts and wills under the submission of God, and obey Him. And it is out of a love that we obey, and that love and obeying isn't ourselves but God causing it. So when our lives begin to change.. and we have a contrite heart.. we are full of shame and humilty we know its because the Lord is working in us. We seek to know God and we know God by His Word.

So what is the difference between those who profess to be Christians and one who is truly saved? That is a deep question I have pondered it myself, I've had some discussion with a friend of mine on that. I think, thought still pondering.. that it comes down to the fact how does the person know Jesus? Someone is to know the Diety of Jesus and know Gods Word. Most the time Christians profress to know the diety of Jesus.. they claim they believe Jesus was God. But the thing is they read the Bible yet not know its truths. They dont understand it, they use it as a book but our blind to the truths. It was this way in my life.. before I was converted, and elected.. before I realized my election and position in Gods family, I used to read the Bible all the time! But I believed that I had choice.. that God allowed things to happen, that He didn't control everything. I read the Bible but I didn't understand the Sovereignty of God, I thought I knew who God was though. I love this song more and more "amazing grace how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me, I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see". Even thought I profressed to know Christ, know of His deity... and I profressed to know the Bible I really didn't know the Bible and what it talked about.. I was blind to the truths until God opened my eyes.

So you know one is saved by how they talk about God and His Word. Actions can be some evidence there must be some fruit of the Spirit but doesn't matter how much. And really salvation isn't by works so I guess we are not to know one by their works? Not sure.. I know Jesus says " you will know they are my disciples by their love". Well God is love, so somehow God and His truths shine from them?

Just some thoughts.. thanks for the deep discussion Milt! Also don't know if you've gotten my email.. but I want you to know.. how sorry I am for any misunderstandings, and ask forgiveness. God bless and you're in my prayers.

Mary

[rlhuckle]

I just want to know: what makes a "christian" a real saved one. What is the difference between a Christian and a saved person...

Milt

Milt, this question has been on my mind the past few days also. What are the marks of the new birth? I have been searching the Scriptures and the internet for expositions and when I look at myself, I fall miserably short of those marks (joy;fruit; godliness with contentment; contrite spirit; etc.).

What does make a Christian a real saved one? There is obviously only one main answer: Jesus Christ. Whatever hope I have, He has given me and is in Him.

Oh Lord when I look at my life and everything I chose to do,
there's not much there that testifies that I'm ever gonna be with You.
Will You take me as I am?

Change me Lord, I'm empty, dry and cold
Fill me with a love as pure as you are
Finer than the finest gold, refine me by your truth, Lord
Make me into more than what I am

[GraceAmbassador]

Milt, this question has been on my mind the past few days also. What are the marks of the new birth? I have been searching the Scriptures and the internet for expositions and when I look at myself, I fall miserably short of those marks (joy;fruit; godliness with contentment; contrite spirit; etc.).

What does make a Christian a real saved one? There is obviously only one main answer: Jesus Christ. Whatever hope I have, He has given me and is in Him.

Oh Lord when I look at my life and everything I chose to do,
there's not much there that testifies that I'm ever gonna be with You.
Will You take me as I am?

Change me Lord, I'm empty, dry and cold
Fill me with a love as pure as you are
Finer than the finest gold, refine me by your truth, Lord
Make me into more than what I am

rlhuckle:

Please, take this question and challenge as a very positive thing. I am speaking in a rather unorganized way because I don't want to be the "answer man" on that one. Note what I said about Paul: his good behavior was not "salvation" for him, whereas in the other hand, he considered himself as a murderer who had the cadaver of his victim tied to his back...

It is very hard to separate the word Christian from the "saved" because of culture, but I believe that the word Christian has no theological value nor it has any meaning that we should even pursue. I am actually growing weary of the word.

In truth, what prompted me to have this conversation in the Forum is that a colleague of mine, a very good guy, claims to be the "real thing" Christian because he defends the things he defends and lives a clean live. But if I tell you what he defends you would say to his face that he is far from being a Christian... He will be quickly to point out, though, the things that Christ suffered and called religious people "like me" he says, who will not defend the same things he defends... My point is that the other side is true as well. There are a lot of people who will reject the things that my friends defends, and they will be right and mostly on my side. However you look upon the things that they accept, and "voila": there is no real "salvation" in them or they do not portray what one could paint as the "profile of the saved one".

I see this as a positive indicative that the control of what we are in God is not in our hands; however it can be detected for the Glory of His name because of what He performs in us and not for what we perform to Him...

Take this thread as something that can lead to glorious discoveries about what God does in us and through us in Jesus Christ and that names and labels of man are nothing but dung. It is CHRIST IN US, THE HOPE OF GLORY! It is not so much as "Us in Him, or Us for Him" it is CHRIST IN US THE HOPE OF GLORY! How do we measure that? WE DON'T!

Milt

[Highlyfavored]

Is what the "Church" calls/identifies as christian really the same thing as being one of the elect?

[jmgipson]

Rom 9:8
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Gal 3:29
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise


I am a child of the promise. Abraham's seed. Seed of the woman. The Israel of God. Brother of Christ. Son of God. A resident of the spiritual Jerusalem. My name is in the book. Look me up.

John

[GraceAmbassador]

Is what the "Church" calls/identifies as christian really the same thing as being one of the elect?

Neine!

Milt

[wildboar]

Simply getting rid of words doesn't solve anything. A Christian is someone who follows Christ and that's a good thing. It's a Biblical word and just because it is misunderstood by some who think that because they are raised in America or because they aren't Buddhist and Muslim that makes them a Christian doesn't mean we should throw out the word anymore than we should throw out Trinity because idiot pastors on the radio teach modalism when they claim to be teaching the Trinity.

If people start throwing around the term Christian we should ask them what they mean by it and use it as an opportunity for discussion. If they abuse the term Christian they can certainly abuse any other term that we choose to use. Just think of how the idea of God's love has been abused, but are we not going to speak of it since people abuse it?

[jmgipson]

Is what the "Church" calls/identifies as christian really the same thing as being one of the elect?

I think Greg it is like the old testament days. Israel was a chosen people, but they were only a shadow or type of the church. Not all Israel is Israel.

John

[wildboar]

Who is a Christian?

Patch Blakey

The term Christian has come to be used in a wide range of meanings, depending on the people using the word. For example, speaking in the broadest possible context, some have used the term to include all sorts of sects and religious organizations that show any connection to the name of Jesus Christ, no matter how remote or loosely defined their doctrine. Some such organizations include the Latter Day Saints (or Mormons), Jehovah's Witnesses, the Harrists, and others that claim the name of Jesus Christ, but without the biblical context of who Jesus Christ is. For such, the historic creeds of the Church have made adequate distinctions.
But even among those who agree with the creeds, there are those who would exclude some who historically have been linked to Christ. Among those who would be excluded by some are Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox.
Still others would define as Christian those who were of a particular age and mental capacity such that they could understand a limited presentation of the gospel and respond to it positively, either by praying a prayer, signing a card, or making some other outward commitment or acknowledgement. The prayer may vary from a humble acknowledgement of the convert's sin to an invitation asking Jesus to come into the person's heart.
There are those who require some sort of experiential manifestation from converts in order for them to truly be called a Christian. Making some sort of unintelligible vocalizations, often called "speaking in tongues," is one such requirement for some to demonstrate before they may be considered a Christian. Alternatives may include uncontrolled laughing or barking, or some other outward "manifestation" of the Holy Spirit's inward working.
Some may require the application of water as in baptism, whether this is full-body immersion, partial immersion, sprinkling or pouring, along with the pronouncement of the members of the Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Even in this camp, there may be those who say that a person is not a Christian unless he has been baptized in their church, which is the "one true church."
For still others, attending church, even a limited number of times a year would qualify them to be called a Christian. National origin or family heritage may be sufficient qualification for others.
Many who go by the name of "evangelical" would say that a person must be regenerated, or made spiritually alive, in order to be called a Christian. Of course, since this is an inward work by the Holy Spirit, it would necessitate some outward affirmation before others would accept the change. Sometimes this entails a personal testimony to a changed life, to others it may be sufficient for the convert to simply state that he now believes in Jesus Christ as his personal Savior.
I'm certain that there are many more examples that could be listed, but the sample range offered suffices to show the wide disparity among people, even those who claim to be Christians themselves, about what does indeed define a Christian. At the same time, there is a very simple and straightforward response, and it is found in the Bible.
Luke recorded in Acts 11:26, "And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." In the context in which this passage is situated, Barnabas was sent to Antioch by the church in Jerusalem in order to exhort the Greeks who had turned to the Lord Jesus (Acts 11:21-23). Later Barnabas sought out Saul (the Apostle Paul) and brought him to Antioch where they taught those who formed the fledgling church there. These fledgling believers are identified in the text initially as disciples.
Now, rather than defining what a disciple is, I will pursue another tack, and show who a disciple is. Jesus initially chose twelve disciples to "be with Him"(Mark 3:14). Over the course of three years, these disciples were integral in all that Jesus did, including eating, sleeping, walking, and sailing with Him. They listened as He taught them, and as He taught others. They were given power to heal sicknesses, cast out devils, and were sent out to preach in His name (Mk 3:14-15). Indeed, these particular disciples were also given another title and a higher office (no longer available today), that of apostle. We are even given the names of these twelve men that Jesus chose to be with Him. It is instructive and perhaps disconcerting that one of these twelve disciples was Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Jesus (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19).
So what is my point? First, I'm not promoting Judas Iscariot as a godly example. He wasn't. He was a lost sinner. Nonetheless, he was still a disciple of Jesus Christ, chosen by the Lord Himself. Because Judas Iscariot was a disciple, then according to Acts 11:26, Judas was also a Christian. This is no doubt distressing to many who would choose to have it otherwise. But if we are going to be consistent with the Bible, then maybe our understanding of who is a Christian needs to allow for the possibility within the Church of those with a nature like Judas. And whenever we may happen to encounter one, we should humbly acknowledge that in the providence of God, tares do exist among the wheat (Mt. 13:30), and both are Christians.

[MCoving]

If not, then what is the distinction for example, from a TV personality who claims to be a Christian but lives like the devil and a unsaved person? What is the difference from TV ministers who are Christians and the SAVED people?
Milt

Well I had a question you said something about someone who claims to be a Christian yet lives like the devil. Then is salvation works based? Because people are sinful, and to be honest we all disobey God, and I guess as what you said "live like the devil" well how are you saying one lives like the devil? In what they do? All sin is pretty much the same.. sin.. disobedience to God. It is not how one lives but about Christ. I think it depends on what they claim.. what they know about Christ and His Word.

It is true that some people can lie.. they can say all the right things and not believe it. Eventually I think their lie would be exposed and one would know that they do not believe in what they confess.

I know someone is a Christian (and yes Christian is just a label given to Jesus' followers in Antioch.. his followers didn't call themselves Christians.. and Jesus never told them to be called Christians) because what they confess about God and believe aligns with the Word. And because of Gods Word and the Holy Spirit in your own life.. one just knows who his brothers in the Lord are. I dont judge someone to be a Christian by their works.

I'm not sure if that is where your question was going or if you were merely wondering about the labeling the word.. instead of what is a true Christian or what is a saved one.. elect.. whatever word one uses.

Alot of times I'll use the term true Christian.. because their are many that call themselves Christians and are not followers of Christ. But just like being labeled a calvinists.. I'm starting to think I dont want to be labeled a Christian because theirs so much negativity connotation with it and false ideas.

Mary

[GraceAmbassador]

So what is my point? First, I'm not promoting Judas Iscariot as a godly example. He wasn't. He was a lost sinner. Nonetheless, he was still a disciple of Jesus Christ, chosen by the Lord Himself. Because Judas Iscariot was a disciple, then according to Acts 11:26, Judas was also a Christian. This is no doubt distressing to many who would choose to have it otherwise. But if we are going to be consistent with the Bible, then maybe our understanding of who is a Christian needs to allow for the possibility within the Church of those with a nature like Judas. And whenever we may happen to encounter one, we should humbly acknowledge that in the providence of God, tares do exist among the wheat (Mt. 13:30), and both are Christians.

That's precisely a very good point and it cannot be ignored: Here we had a disciple, Judas, that, unless someone shows me otherwise, WAS NOT SAVED; an UNSAVED CHRISTIAN. In the second analogy, "tares" are indeed Christians, but tares will be destroyed and they are not "SAVED CHRISTIANS", again, until someone shows me otherwise. I believe this is analogous to "vessels of dishonor" who are created by the same Creator of vessels of honor.

It is true that saved ones are not saved by works; it is also true that saved ones will lean more toward the conduct of the other 11 disciples than that of Judas Iscariot. By all accounts, Judas did not only demonstrate signs of being unsaved by betraying Jesus, but there was a pattern of misconduct if we are to believe the accounts of the Bible about him. So, to say that a Christian can go deliberately in a life of sinning and expect the other elect to consider that person a "saved Christian" is folly and un-biblical. The elect, as a collective body, as a matter of fact was given authority by Paul to rebuke bad behaving Christians (such as the one who had an affair with his father's wife), but also to completely shun that person and no longer fellowship with him.

Most people who defend the position that saved people will continue in sin and there is nothing that can be said to put to doubt their "salvation" have a problem themselves with constant misconduct either in the moral or the social aspect, which identifies a worse problem: a spiritual problem. Some do prefer to be Christians but keep enough of worldliness in them just to have some fun along the way; they have no commitment with God; they have a form of Godliness but deny the power thereof.

I believe the quote in the article above depicts exactly my point: A Christian like Judas, or a tare-Christian is indeed a Christian, but it is an unsaved Christian. If we really go deep into the analogy we have to admit that Judas, the Christian Judas, was actually chosen as the "son of perdition". What can be more depicting of REPROBATION? If we go even deeper, we will realize that the TARES were planted by Satan (of course as a puny servant of the Sovereign God). So the tares are also unsaved Christians, as I said in the beginning of this post. More than that, both "Judas type of Christians" and the "tares type of Christians" are in fact UNELECT, REPROBATE Christians!

Ultimately, I want to be like, follow and fellowship with those who are like the other eleven Christians who were disciples of Jesus than to follow and be like the example and conduct of Judas; Ultimately I would rather fellowship with wheat-Christians than the tares-Christian!

Milt

[Jack Daw]

Well I had a question you said something about someone who claims to be a Christian yet lives like the devil. Then is salvation works based? Because people are sinful, and to be honest we all disobey God, and I guess as what you said "live like the devil" well how are you saying one lives like the devil? In what they do? All sin is pretty much the same.. sin.. disobedience to God. It is not how one lives but about Christ. I think it depends on what they claim.. what they know about Christ and His Word.

Maybe you should check what you answered in the questionnaire:

Is there such a thing as a "Dead Faith?"No, there is no such thing as a "dead faith" because those who give mental assent to the truth will undoubtedly perform good works.
I'm sure Milt means living in habitual (& unrepentant) sin by "living like a devil".

[MCoving]

So, to say that a Christian can go deliberately in a life of sinning and expect the other elect to consider that person a "saved Christian" is folly and un-biblical. The elect, as a collective body, as a matter of fact was given authority by Paul to rebuke bad behaving Christians (such as the one who had an affair with his father's wife), but also to completely shun that person and no longer fellowship with him.

Most people who defend the position that saved people will continue in sin and there is nothing that can be said to put to doubt their "salvation" have a problem themselves with constant misconduct either in the moral or the social aspect, which identifies a worse problem: a spiritual problem. Some do prefer to be Christians but keep enough of worldliness in them just to have some fun along the way; they have no commitment with God; they have a form of Godliness but deny the power thereof.

Milt

Now I think what you are saying is people who continue on sinning and do not really care that they are right? I mean they know its wrong yet they do not care because as you said they want to keep a little bit of fun in their lives. Someone who sins and does not care I would have some doubt as to his or her salvation.

However if someone is struggling with stopping sin, where say they know its wrong, feel convicted afterwards and cry out to God for help and deliverance, and really seek the Scriptures and give it their all to stop... then they fall again say three months later. Do we then doubt their salvation? Or do we continue to spur them on to good works, encouraging them to get back up on the horse and try again?

I know in my own life a particular sin I was committing I struggled with since becoming a saved Christian in March of this year (some time around there... do not have specifics). Well March until really the beginning of July I struggled with this sin. I would say there was victory over it that finally it was gone from my life, and then it would happen again. Seemed like a never-ending cycle, and I did not know why. Then one day God brought circumstances into my life to discipline me, he continued working in me to 'cause me to obey. Now it is finally out of my life God Willing, and it is a very freeing feeling! Course it was hard up until the point but when God brought repentance to the point where I cried literally all morning! I felt so bad that I had disappointed God and my friends so much, and myself. It was a relief and freeing feeling after it was all done.

Therefore, I think that sometimes saved Christians can have sins in their lives that take time to remove, sometimes it is not just instantly, and sometimes it is. Maybe its not instantly because we are depraved sinful creatures... and God just keeps working on His children until they are free from a particular sin. Maybe as one gets older (grows in spiritual maturity) the sins they struggle with once they notice it and ask for Gods deliverance they are stopped instantly. That would be nice. Then comes some other sin and we start the process and cycle over again to not sin. And the more we continue in reading the Scriptures the more our sin becomes apparent and we seek God to teach us to not do it, and to change us.

What do people think? Is this right? I've thought about this a lot, because well before in the Baptist church I was taught so much false doctrine that some days I don’t know what to believe.. I just keep reading Scripture asking God to teach me and to sift out all the bad theology. Thanks for reading this long response!! And thanks for being patient with me as I grow in the Lord… even if its such a small and gradual growth.

Mary

[GraceAmbassador]

The key word is "deliberately", which means, willfully.

I cannot judge and will not judge anyone's salvation experience and this is not the main thrust of this thread. We have mentioned reasons as to why we should or should not fellowship with someone or some group and the emphasis was solely in doctrinal aspects. Internet Forum have made the Salvation experience into knowledge and Sovereign Grace Forums are the great culprit because of the way they sometimes (rightfully so) mock people who do not believe as they, the Sovereign Grace people, do and choose not to fellowship with them or call them brothers and sisters.

It is correct to decide on fellowshipping with someone or a group on the grounds of common belief, but it is also correct, legitimate and expected of us to choose to fellowship and call brothers and sisters mostly those who will be more like the 11 disciples of Jesus, than the Christian that Judas was. (If you just joined this thread, you have to read previous posts to understand this analogy). Paul in fact COMMANDS us to refrain from fellowship and even praying for rebellious Christians that remain in sin; this is a matter of obedience to the Word of God rather than simply a "choice"; but even the ones who are rebellious and willfully sinners can be saved as in the case of the one Paul declares "let the devil take his body that his soul may be saved". But there are steps that we must follow in obedience to the Apostolic command in terms of fellowship. I can name at least two: doctrine and conduct.

Talking about the "devil taking one's body" reminds us of also another aspect: is how certain moral and social sins affect one's body, are sins against the body, which is the temple of the Holy Spirit; so a sin causes another sin and a chain reaction of sinning behavior. A little leaven ferments the whole lump! That's why fellowship with such a group has to be, to say the least, monitored. I have made my decision on these matters: As much as I will avoid fraternal fellowship with heretics and rebellious people I will avoid fraternal fellowship with those who continue in their sins in spite of all warnings, counseling and prayers of the brethren.

By the way, the fact that some Baptists have some errors in terms of Sovereign Grace doctrine, does not mean that ALL that they teach is wrong. Some of their understanding of Christian conduct, as long as the motivation is not to "manipulate God" into blessing them, as long as it is in praise and adoration, true heartily worship to God, SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. Even if the motivation is wrong, we should follow the example with the right motivation and not proscribe their teaching all together.

Paul teaches us to examine everything and retain that which is good.

Milt

[MCoving]

The key word is "deliberately", which means, willfully.

I cannot judge and will not judge anyone's salvation experience and this is not the main thrust of this thread. We have mentioned reasons as to why we should or should not fellowship with someone or some group and the emphasis was solely in doctrinal aspects. Internet Forum have made the Salvation experience into knowledge and Sovereign Grace Forums are the great culprit because of the way they sometimes (rightfully so) mock people who do not believe as they, the Sovereign Grace people, do and choose not to fellowship with them or call them brothers and sisters.

It is correct to decide on fellowshipping with someone or a group on the grounds of common belief, but it is also correct, legitimate and expected of us to choose to fellowship and call brothers and sisters mostly those who will be more like the 11 disciples of Jesus, than the Christian that Judas was. (If you just joined this thread, you have to read previous posts to understand this analogy). Paul in fact COMMANDS us to refrain from fellowship and even praying for rebellious Christians that remain in sin; this is a matter of obedience to the Word of God rather than simply a "choice"; but even the ones who are rebellious and willfully sinners can be saved as in the case of the one Paul declares "let the devil take his body that his soul may be saved". But there are steps that we must follow in obedience to the Apostolic command in terms of fellowship. I can name at least two: doctrine and conduct.

Talking about the "devil taking one's body" reminds us of also another aspect: is how certain moral and social sins affect one's body, are sins against the body, which is the temple of the Holy Spirit; so a sin causes another sin and a chain reaction of sinning behavior. A little leaven ferments the whole lump! That's why fellowship with such a group has to be, to say the least, monitored. I have made my decision on these matters: As much as I will avoid fraternal fellowship with heretics and rebellious people I will avoid fraternal fellowship with those who continue in their sins in spite of all warnings, counseling and prayers of the brethren.

By the way, the fact that some Baptists have some errors in terms of Sovereign Grace doctrine, does not mean that ALL that they teach is wrong. Some of their understanding of Christian conduct, as long as the motivation is not to "manipulate God" into blessing them, as long as it is in praise and adoration, true heartily worship to God, SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. Even if the motivation is wrong, we should follow the example with the right motivation and not proscribe their teaching all together.

Paul teaches us to examine everything and retain that which is good.

Milt

Thanks for that response! Yes the key word is deliberatively, which you said willfully. I'm sorry I didn't pick up on that in your previous thread otherwise I would have understood more. It is true there are some people that one needs to be careful of the ones who as you said willfully go on sinning, as in they dont care, they are not trying to stop or anything. And then there are others who struggle with the sin and truly desire change, and seek the Lord. One definitely needs to be able to know their bretheren though before making such a choice not to fellowship with them though. Because sometimes I'm sure it seems as if people are sinning willfully when really they are not. They are trying to get out, sometimes its hard to get out of a hole that has been dug very deep. Not impossible with God actually easy with God but in our perspective hard.

And yes you are right that many Christians who are not saved within the Baptist churches do many good works. They know how to follow commands of the Bible even though their motives are wrong. But from my experience so far and talking with people those who are truly saved Christians tend to notice awful sins in their lives that many profressing Christians never struggle with. I sometimes wonder why it is.. most of the times those sins that one struggles with at the beginning of their walk and eventually are delievered from are drugs, alchohol and sex.. the three big sins in the churches these days.. the ones that often people get condemned for in the church (church as in institution like my old baptist church).

I like your distinction between Christian and saved Christian. I think I may use that more.. sometimes I would say professing Christian but not really a true Christian. They profess the diety of Christ yet they do not know the Word of God and what it teaches. They are blind to certain truths of Scripture, and when addressed with those truths often reject them as they dont want to be not in control of their lives and have some sort of choice and power, a selfish motive.

Thanks for this thread! Enjoyed responding and trying to understand, I appreciate you and others on this forum. Have a good day and God bless!!

Mary