People leaving Church

[SovereignGrace]

Hi Nodak, the nameless doctrine(it's the Doctrines of Grace...) asserts that God chose individuals for salvation before creation, so that when we are born, we are already sheep (the chosen) or goats (the passed over.)

[snip]

"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ. In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.[Ephesians 1:4-12]

Look at how the Spirit moved Paul to write the above. We, His ppl, His chosen, His elect, were chosen before, not on the very first day of creation, not during the days of Joseph, Moses, David, Samuel, Peter, James, and John, but before the creation of the world. We were elected/chosen in eternity, and our conversion happened within the confines of time.

Of course that view is mistaken,

Your view is the mistaken view.

we are sheep, but not His sheep,

Puh-leeze!! Then whose sheep were we? Satan's? Satan has never owned a sheep. All he governs are goats. When we were under his rule, we were still His sheep, not his(Satan's). That is what it is meant by the verse For “you were like sheep going astray,” but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.[1 Peter 2:25]

while we live, and when we die, if we have not been sealed in Christ as one of His sheep,

All of His sheep He will gather in. This nonsense you post about some of God's sheep dying lost is utter ridiculous. Jesus said He would lose none of His ppl.

we get put with the goats.

Sheep=sheep, goats=goats. No sheep are found on the left when Jesus renders their condemned sentence per Matthew 25.

The correct view has salvation as an opportunity during our lives,

This is the wrong view folks!! Salvation, per the above, is watered down to an opportunity. Salvation is guaranteed to those in the covenant of redemption. All those who are not in that covenant have been left to their own devices.

and the incorrect view has us predestined to be saved or damned before we are even conceived.

Please quit trying to act like you know our beliefs. You are nowhere close to knowing our view. Please. Stop. It. God chose a ppl out of all fallen humanity to redeem. He did not have to even save one of them, yet in His grace, He chose a multitude that no man can #, and you take umbrage with it. [snip]

 

[JonC]

JonC, why did you find disagreement with this? This was EXACTLY what I was trying(poorly) to express.

I disagreed with his last statement. It is not about knowing the hearts of others but about applying a distinction Scripture makes at "on that day" to those (even generally speaking) to these times. It harkens more to those like Daniel Parker than it does Scripture.

I agree with what you are getting at (churches trying to grow by appealing to the world, the dangers of such watered down doctrine, etc.). But we were called out from the world, we were once lost, we were once slaves to sin. We were never in that category of "goat". Scripture speaks of the world and the sheep in this lifetime. The goat illustration is "on that day". I disagreed because I think it important to keep it biblical even when we think unbiblical has a better slogan or cartoon or clown picture.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I disagreed with his last statement. It is not about knowing the hearts of others but about applying a distinction Scripture makes at "on that day" to those (even generally speaking) to these times. It harkens more to those like Daniel Parker than it does Scripture.

I agree with what you are getting at (churches trying to grow by appealing to the world, the dangers of such watered down doctrine, etc.). But we were called out from the world, we were once lost, we were once slaves to sin. We were never in that category of "goat". Scripture speaks of the world and the sheep in this lifetime. The goat illustration is "on that day". I disagreed because I think it important to keep it biblical even when we think unbiblical has a better slogan or cartoon or clown picture.

I was not saying we know others' hearts. Only God does.

 

[JonC]

I was not saying we know others' hearts. Only God does.

I think that I agree with what you are saying, just not how you stated it. I never took you to be claiming to know the heart of another (and I apologize that post# 62 could be taken that I did when that was not my intent).

Matthew 25 talks about the nations being gathered and God separating them AS a shepherd separates sheep from goats. This speaks of the actions of God and not "goats and sheep" coexisting in churches today. The Bible speaks of the world and the Church, of sheep called out from the world and sheep sent out into the world, of wheat and tares in the Church. I disagreed because I believe that it was a mistake to use “goats” as you have as it is not in context with what I have taken your reference to be (Matthew 25).

The difference is important. We were once slaves to sin, lost, without Christ. But we are His sheep. Had you used a biblical reference in context (i.e., the world) then I would have agreed with your post. I think that we need to be more careful with our words than we often are (even when the comparison would be cool on a t-shirt).

 

[Van]

[snip]

"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ,

The reason it says chose us in Him is because when God chose His Redeemer He in effect chose corporately all His redeemer would redeem.

We were elected/chosen in eternity, and our conversion happened within the confines of time.

No, we are chosen during our lifetime, after we have lived without mercy. We are chosen for salvation through faith in the truth (2 Thess. 2:13) which means after we put our trust in Christ which means after we heard the gospel during our lives on earth.

For “you were like sheep going astray,” but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.[1 Peter 2:25]

This verse is addressing born anew believers who do not strive to follow the Shepherd's path, and stray. Peter is teaching we are to be diligent, growing on the pure milk of the Word.

All of His sheep He will gather in. This nonsense you post about some of God's sheep dying lost is utter ridiculous. Jesus said He would lose none of His ppl.

The lost are like sheep without a Shepherd.

Salvation, per the above, is watered down to an opportunity. Salvation is guaranteed to those in the covenant of redemption. All those who are not in that covenant have been left to their own devices.

Only those who God has transferred into Christ spiritually are guaranteed by being sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit forever.[/QUOTE]

 

[Rob_BW]

http://www.demographia.com/db-religlarge.htm

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/factchecker-are-all-christian-denominations-in-decline

 

[JonC]

I'm reminded of a sermon (not by your post, Rob) by Jeremy Myers:

"In Luke 18:17, Jesus says that anyone who does not receive the kingdom like a little child shall not enter into it. Childlike faith provides entrance into the kingdom. And yet many Christians confuse having faith like a child with actually behaving like a child. There are many who may or may not have childlike faith, but who behave in childish ways. Jesus wants us to be childlike, not childish."

One reason churches struggle may be immaturity (both in the faith and in general).

 

[JonC]

First, I am trying to keep this on topic, but apologize if it drifts a bit. Second, to the other moderators and administrators – if this is misplaced then please feel free to delete the post. We have all agreed to be subject to have our posts edited or deleted at the discretion of the staff, and I (for one) appreciate the oversight as the tongue is often hard to control.

There are a few people here that are trying to derail this (and just about every thread that does not go their way). These people agreed to the rules of this forum yet their posts are often off topic, gossip, insulting, immature, and defamatory. Yet they hit the “agree” button when they joined (or rejoined) this forum. In other words, they are not true to their word.

They may object that others are also slacking in this regard, but the wrongs of others do not justify the wrongs they inflict (this was one of the hardest things I had to teach my solders when I was in service).

Other members agreed to those terms as well. It is right that they expect at least some degree of enforcement of what we’ve all agreed upon. It is not right that others are subject to defamatory remarks from a select few individuals. It is not right that topics (such as this one) become derailed because a couple of people want to gossip and play childish games.

You want to know why so many are leaving churches in the western world? This is one reason. Church has too often become a childish game without accountability, responsibility, or a sense of eternal consequence. You want to glimpse the problem? Look at the interactions of some right here on this forum.

Church membership is often taken far too lightly. There is no accountability or responsibility...no discipleship. It's far to easy to move from one church to another. (I'm one of those who believes that church membership approaches a covenant agreement between members). We live in an immature culture (grown men still spend hours playing video games and watching superhero movies). We have immature Christians. Well meaning people sometimes derail churches just like well meaning (giving benefit of the doubt) people derail threads here. Some people simply have agendas they want to shove down other's throats, regardless of the appropriateness of the action. Sometimes things are wrong not because of what they are but because of how or when they are presented.

 

[Rob_BW]

I just figured that before we blame dwindling church membership numbers on certain beliefs or doctrines, we should glimpse the actual numbers and see if they match up with any purported suppositions.

 

[JonC]

I just figured that before we blame dwindling church membership numbers on certain beliefs or doctrines, we should glimpse the actual numbers and see if they match up with any purported suppositions.

Good point, Rob. I've wondered what the overall numbers would tell. We see people changing churches and denominations all the time. In my area we have dozens of "non-denominational" churches popping up, and some of them are rather large. Those people had to come from somewhere (I suspect many came from the churches who are experiencing a decline in numbers).

But numbers don't really tell the tell. Looking at the growth of other non-Christian churches, I have to wonder what many who are searching for something are actually finding. In my opinion we need to be less numbers driven and more gospel faithful.

 

[Van]

JonC, post # 68 made several good points, thanks. Scripture mentions the blind leading the blind. Might it be we have "church members" who have not been discipled, and therefore behave in an unChrist-like manner, and that then sours those who come to fellowship and learn with other believers?

But would that explain why three times as many leave from Mainline churches as from Evangelical churches? I do not think so.

One question I wish had been asked of those leaving, "did you come to church to be served, or to serve?" Those who had been taught all Christ commanded would know the right answer.

 

[StefanM]

But would that explain why three times as many leave from Mainline churches as from Evangelical churches? I do not think so.

Appropriate discipleship isn't possible in a liberal church because it isn't based on a proper understanding of God and his Word.

 

[Van]

Yes, StefanM, it is possible a significant fraction are not leaving "church" but a shadow with its lampstand removed. There but by the grace of God ....

 

[JonC]

JonC, post # 68 made several good points, thanks. Scripture mentions the blind leading the blind. Might it be we have "church members" who have not been discipled, and therefore behave in an unChrist-like manner, and that then sours those who come to fellowship and learn with other believers?

But would that explain why three times as many leave from Mainline churches as from Evangelical churches? I do not think so.

One question I wish had been asked of those leaving, "did you come to church to be served, or to serve?" Those who had been taught all Christ commanded would know the right answer.

Those are good questions, Van. At one time I would have said that we attend church to serve, but upon reflection I am not so sure that this is the case. The reason is that we serve but we are also served (we function as a member of the Body of Christ). I need to be uplifted, to be built up and equipped just as much as I am commanded to uplift, build up and equip others.

What your post made me wonder is if this sense of wanting to have our needs met plays into the decline in numbers within the mainline church (mainline churches are often seen as establishments where one’s spiritual needs are met), but the sense of needing to serve, to be “plugged in”, accounts for the decline in doctrine and a sense of dissatisfaction as people shift from one evangelical church to another (evangelical churches have, in my experience, sacrificed discipleship for evangelism).

I belonged to a church for years that was mostly show. It was evangelical and rushed to get people to “plug in” to some program. If you wanted to sing in front of the church, audition for the praise team. If you are good enough do audio/visual (several wanted to, but no one was good enough so they hired it out). It was serve, don’t be served. I think that a proper church has a balance in the sense that we are served (we are disciple, and our needs are met by the assembly) while we serve (we disciple and meet the needs of others).

I don’t know…those are just some thoughts. I may be influenced by my dissatisfaction from my experience. But as ThousandHills would say, it’s something that I’ve been “noodling”. And you've given me more to noodle.

 

[JamesL]

I would suppose every one of the faithful has seen more than enough people come and go, and everyone has an opinion as to why. One pastor I had said that he was tired of seeing people blow in, blow up, and blow out.

He put the blame on the people who left. They weren't faithful. They were "playing church" (I hate that phrase, btw). They didn't get enough entertainment. They didn't get their ears tickled....

It so happens that I was in that church before I became a believer. I was trying to reach God from my own efforts and had never heard the gospel.

I was still in that church when I became a believer. And I talked eith that pastor about the people. I told him they need to hear about grace. His response floored me: "you don't want to tell them that because then they'll think they can act however they want."

I was appointed as a children's Sunday School teacher not long after, way too early imo. And I taught those kids about the cross. I left about a year after becoming a believer.

And I came to the assessment that people leave because they're not believers. They never hear the gospel and can only hang around for so long in the flesh.

The last SBC (Lifeway) Sunday School teachers' conferences I went to seemed to promote Sunday Christianity with their "Sunday Rules" theme. This was four years ago, and I saw a lot of people come to the front of the church and recite a prayer, become marginally involved for 4 months, then disappear.

I'm sure the reasons are plentiful. The church is wrong, the people are wrong, the teaching is wrong, the devil has blinded them, the Lord hasn't opened their eyes....probably plenty of each

 

[Van]

Thanks JamesL, your thoughts seem to me for the most part to be right in line with scripture.

Certainly, if the church is anywhere near being a real church, growing and serving others, then those that leave would seem to be not of us. Can we jump to the conclusion they bought into "another gospel" the "fire insurance model" and when faithfulness did not allow going with the flow, they left?

I would not put too much stock in blaming Satan for blinding them, or the Lord for not opening their eyes, most, according to Matthew 13, see well enough but choose the comfort and security seemingly offered by this world, over sharing in the suffering of Christ.

 

[robycop3]

Remember, a "great falling away" is prophesied!

 

[JamesL]

Certainly, if the church is anywhere near being a real church, growing and serving others, then those that leave would seem to be not of us. Can we jump to the conclusion they bought into "another gospel" the "fire insurance model" and when faithfulness did not allow going with the flow, they left?

Sometimes it's a fire insurance model, sometimes it's a very strenuous works-oriented model. From what I've seen it's mostly a blend of the two:
Make series of confessions and promises, straighten up your behavior, "invite" Jesus into your heart and make Him Lord of your life.....then you have eternal life with all your own effort but without any knowledge of the cross or any hope built upon Christ's atoning work. Then you have your fire insurance.

I would not put too much stock in blaming Satan for blinding them, or the Lord for not opening their eyes, most, according to Matthew 13, see well enough but choose the comfort and security seemingly offered by this world, over sharing in the suffering of Christ.

I don't see any reason to not put any stock in what scripture plainly says. As far as unbelievers, Jesus said the devil snatches the word away in order to keep them from believing, and Paul said the god of this world has blinded them.

About believers, Jesus said that He is revealed to us by the Father. And Paul said the light shines in our hearts to believe the gospel.

I would not at all discount the supernatural. Paul also said our battles are not against flesh and blood, therefore put on the armor of God...shield of faith, sword of the Spirit, et al

 

[Van]

JamesL, please stop misrepresenting to create strawman arguments to knock down. Did I say put no stock or put too much stock. But how do you present it. As if I said to not put any stock. Good grief, I get this from others, now you?

Does scripture say or suggest Satan has blinded the minds of all unbelievers, such that they cannot understand the gospel? Nope. Then why suggest it. You seem to have read 2 Corinthians 4:4 but skipped verse 2. Did Jesus say the devil snatches the gospel away from all unbelievers, or just the first of 4 soils. Why suggest He did?

There is absolutely no support for the bogus idea that all unbelievers are unable to respond to the gospel.
If that is what you are pushing, it is wrong.

 

[JamesL]

JamesL, please stop misrepresenting to create strawman arguments to knock down. Did I say put no stock or put too much stock. But how do you present it. As if I said to not put any stock. Good grief, I get this from others, now you?

Brother, I think you're too used to being on the defensive. I said I wouldn't discount the supernatural. I didn't say dismiss. There is a difference. You said not too much stock, which is taking the supernatural too lightly. I think the supernatural must be considered through and through.

Does scripture say or suggest Satan has blinded the minds of all unbelievers, such that they cannot understand the gospel? Nope. Then why suggest it. You seem to have read 2 Corinthians 4:4 but skipped verse 2.

I didn't skip anything in verse 2. Paul said he preached the unadulterated Word. And if it be veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing - in which the god of this world has blinded them to the truth. But God shines forth through the darkness to shine the light of the gospel into our hearts. In short, we have a supernatural "aha" to the gospel. It's all right there in the same chapter

Did Jesus say the devil snatches the gospel away from all unbelievers, or just the first of 4 soils. Why suggest He did?

The first soil is the only ones who don't believe. The last 3 all have eternal life - apart from works.

There is absolutely no support for the bogus idea that all unbelievers are unable to respond to the gospel.
If that is what you are pushing, it is wrong.

it's not a "response"
More than one scripture likens it to a seed in the ground. The ground doesn't respond. Either the seed takes or it doesn't.

Hardness of heart is like hardness of soil. Ever try planting carrots in clay?