MennoNet.com

From another thread:

Christ proclaimed the reason He was sent in Luke 4:23 - the kingdom of God. Obviously that was not His only reason as yes He died for our transgressions, but I also believe that if someone accepts Christ so they can be saved - they actually may not be according to Christ's words

Before we get started, I realize I may be wrong about my impression, so feel free to rip it to shreds. Secondly, the fact that this quote comes from a post by Wade is nothing towards Wade or his position- it simply jogged my memory to write this post.

As I've read various pieces by those who identify with "Kingdom Christianity" (Bercot and the like), I'm disturbed by the light cast on those who claim salvation and new birth without an understand of the kingdom movement.
Here's what I mean: The way these texts are written, it seems to treat a solid understanding of and an adherence to Kingdom Christianity as a prerequisite for true salvation and preservation. The idea seems to be that if someone claims to come to salvation through, say, hellfire for example,that they are being selfish and loving themselves; not God. Therefore, they really are not saved. This seems to be a real picking-point against others; I've heard multiple Mennonite speakers speak out against the hymn "I'll Fly Away" because it is deemed selfish escapism.

So I'm wondering, is a salvation experience that comes from a degree of fear anti-Biblical? Is it valid? The desire to be loosed of a punishment is pretty natural, and we're often convinced of such by a degree of fear, so can it be used to further Godliness?
Matt 5:29-30 seems to use the possibility of hell as a motivator.
Matt 13:42-43 is pretty explicit, and quite frightening, about punishment.
... I could point to a few others, but I think these 2 examples will suffice for now.

My point is that we do see Jesus and the apostles using, what appears to me, words that should convey a fear of impending and due punishment for wickedness. We even see early Anabaptists using harsh language that clearly were said to incite a degree of fear. Menno warned the princes that God's wrath would "pour over [them] like water". If you were in the crowd of any of these speakers, you just may have thought "Hey, I sure don't want that.. I should probably follow this guy!".

What do you think?

Jude says "Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."

I see a teaching here that some people will come to God through compassion, and some through fear. But both must also count the cost and to do that they need to be taught, or shown the cost.

RZehr wrote:I see a teaching here that some people will come to God through compassion, and some through fear. But both must also count the cost and to do that they need to be taught, or shown the cost.

Fully agree with this point. I thought about including Jude 1:23 (what an easy chapter/ verse to remember..) in the OP.

That is why I said, "may," in my statement.

I have had some pretty hard discussions calling people to repentance and telling them of the lake of fire...

What does bother me and maybe it is in part because the church we are members at, is the continued teaching on eternal security and once saved always saved doctrine. And it seems to me often times people start trusting in their own salvation rather than God's salvation. I just wish we would doubt ourselves more and doubt God less.

Wade wrote:What does bother me and maybe it is in part because the church we are members at, is the continued teaching on eternal security and once saved always saved doctrine. And it seems to me often times people start trusting in their own salvation rather than God's salvation. I just wish we would doubt ourselves more and doubt God less.

I can see how that's bothersome to you, but I'd say the majority of non-CA's don't truly believe in eternal security in that sense.

KingdomBuilder wrote:

Wade wrote:What does bother me and maybe it is in part because the church we are members at, is the continued teaching on eternal security and once saved always saved doctrine. And it seems to me often times people start trusting in their own salvation rather than God's salvation. I just wish we would doubt ourselves more and doubt God less.

I can see how that's bothersome to you, but I'd say the majority of non-CA's don't truly believe in eternal security in that sense.

I didn't know that?

KingdomBuilder wrote:

Wade wrote:What does bother me and maybe it is in part because the church we are members at, is the continued teaching on eternal security and once saved always saved doctrine. And it seems to me often times people start trusting in their own salvation rather than God's salvation. I just wish we would doubt ourselves more and doubt God less.

I can see how that's bothersome to you, but I'd say the majority of non-CA's don't truly believe in eternal security in that sense.

I didn't know that?

Wade wrote:I didn't know that?

I'm confused by the question mark... sorry. Are you confirming that you already knew that?

KingdomBuilder wrote:From another thread:

Christ proclaimed the reason He was sent in Luke 4:23 - the kingdom of God. Obviously that was not His only reason as yes He died for our transgressions, but I also believe that if someone accepts Christ so they can be saved - they actually may not be according to Christ's words

Before we get started, I realize I may be wrong about my impression, so feel free to rip it to shreds. Secondly, the fact that this quote comes from a post by Wade is nothing towards Wade or his position- it simply jogged my memory to write this post.

As I've read various pieces by those who identify with "Kingdom Christianity" (Bercot and the like), I'm disturbed by the light cast on those who claim salvation and new birth without an understand of the kingdom movement.
Here's what I mean: The way these texts are written, it seems to treat a solid understanding of and an adherence to Kingdom Christianity as a prerequisite for true salvation and preservation. The idea seems to be that if someone claims to come to salvation through, say, hellfire for example,that they are being selfish and loving themselves; not God. Therefore, they really are not saved. This seems to be a real picking-point against others; I've heard multiple Mennonite speakers speak out against the hymn "I'll Fly Away" because it is deemed selfish escapism.

So I'm wondering, is a salvation experience that comes from a degree of fear anti-Biblical? Is it valid? The desire to be loosed of a punishment is pretty natural, and we're often convinced of such by a degree of fear, so can it be used to further Godliness?
Matt 5:29-30 seems to use the possibility of hell as a motivator.
Matt 13:42-43 is pretty explicit, and quite frightening, about punishment.
... I could point to a few others, but I think these 2 examples will suffice for now.

My point is that we do see Jesus and the apostles using, what appears to me, words that should convey a fear of impending and due punishment for wickedness. We even see early Anabaptists using harsh language that clearly were said to incite a degree of fear. Menno warned the princes that God's wrath would "pour over [them] like water". If you were in the crowd of any of these speakers, you just may have thought "Hey, I sure don't want that.. I should probably follow this guy!".

What do you think?

Interesting subject. Some regard everyone to be immortal and therefore it is a case of where they will spend eternity. Personally, I don't. I believe God is immortal and those who receive Christ as their Saviour have been given the gift of eternal life.

When I look at what scripture says about how the apostles preached the Gospel, I don't see the use of fear tactics regarding a never ending place of torment. So, it seems to me, their understanding of what Jesus said about Gehenna did not translate into an existence of never ending torment. If they believed in this and truly loved others as they love themselves, would they not 'scare the hell' (so to speak) out of people to obtain converts ? Instead I think their focus was more on the current affects of sin on us. As in Acts 2:40 - " With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." And it was a message of 'save me' as they had previously asked what shall we do after Peter pointed out they had crucified the Messiah. And 3,000 were saved that day. Furthermore, I don't see the point of never ending torment and especially if it also applies to people raised as Muslims or Hindus or whatever. How do I view God in a just and loving way who desires that no one should perish ? Seems to me, the church messed up and strayed from the examples we have by the apostles. Another believer who sees it that way - https://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.c ... m9j86inG00

On the other hand, I know of those who have given their life to Christ and are serving Him today that heard a 'hell fire' sermon and responded. I think if they just wanted some formula to save them from such an existence, then I suspect they were not born again. However, what goes along with 'hell fire' preaching is to repent and turn to Jesus for salvation from sin. God knows if the intent was to believe and truly repent of sin and regardless of whether or not they were trying to avoid this hell, the willingness and repentance may be enough recognition of the Saviour that God made them into a new creation.

Today, along with a Christus Victor view of the atonement, I prefer the emphasis to be on what Jesus did to offer us the free gift of eternal life as well as the ability to have new power to not allow sin to keep messing up our lives. If this sounds like looking out for ourselves, then I agree. That is what salvation is about. It is about be reconciled to God and with that we enter into a new Kingdom way of life that causes us then to be concerned about the eternal state of others.

At this point, subject to being convinced otherwise, I believe eternal fire is as it was referred to in Sodom and Gommorah. No one can put it out and it will achieve (destroy) what it is put on. Whatever pain is involved will be according to a just and loving God who wishes for no one to perish (be destroyed).

If you ever want to read probably the scariest sermon on hell read this - https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/ed ... inners.cfm

or listen to it here -

KingdomBuilder wrote:

Wade wrote:What does bother me and maybe it is in part because the church we are members at, is the continued teaching on eternal security and once saved always saved doctrine. And it seems to me often times people start trusting in their own salvation rather than God's salvation. I just wish we would doubt ourselves more and doubt God less.

I can see how that's bothersome to you, but I'd say the majority of non-CA's don't truly believe in eternal security in that sense.

I spent over a year recently in a Baptist church that taught eternal security but along with this teaching they emphasized the need to know you have been born again and how that shows up in your living. This belief that if you are truly born again you can't become unborn again didn't really bother me as it was taught there. It wasn't taught as a license to sin which often those who don't believe we are eternally secure, think it is. I believe we can have assurance of our salvation when the Spirit of God bears witness with our spirit that we are His child. Once saved, if we still have free will, the issue is whether or not we would ever abandon our faith in Christ. Not all OSAS Christians are using this belief as a license to sin. Some think this is a satanic doctrine that results in a very lax Christian practise. In my experience, not true with many.