Hot, Cold or Lukewarm?

[Christ's Free Servant]

Ok guys, let's get this over with. I wish for those who are disagreeing with me to now list all of the things I must do to prove I am not lukewarm and therefore not be spit out. Please list all of the good works I must now perform to keep from being spit out. What must I do to be deserving of my salvation? Let's have at it.

I believe we have hit the "nerve" of your contention. You are concerned that we are saying that if you personally do not perform up to a certain standard that God is going to reject you. Is that it? Well, there are all kinds of schools of thought on that, and I don't intend to open up another can of worms, but there are numerous scriptures that do set a criteria for the individual believer as "proof" that he or she has been regenerated. It is not a matter of earning one's salvation or even of deserving one's salvation. None of us are deserving - even while we were yet sinners Christ died for us - all have sinned and fall short of God's glory - and none of us can earn our salvation by good works - it is by grace you are saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.

Now, with that said, I think perhaps the argument at hand here is to define "faith." There have been many discussions on that subject here, but I think that is really your question, if I am hearing you correctly. And, perhaps we should also define "about to spit you out of my mouth." I think if you read it in context, the passage goes on to say that those the Lord loves he rebukes and disciplines, so I look at this phrase to be an exercise of God's rebuke and discipline, the form of which is certainly debatable. I personally believe that God disciplines "lukewarm" Christians to get them to repent of their sin and he disciplines other believers for the purpose of maturity. Whether or not a true believer can lose his salvation in the process or whether these "lukewarm" Christians are true believers in Christ is certainly debatable, but I think we should save that discussion for another thread.

Ok, back to the subject of "faith." Hebrews 11 is the "Faith" chapter of our Bible. It is filled with stories of people who demonstrated their faith by what they did. The book of James is all about faith that is evidenced by what we do. The book of I John is also another book that says if you say you have faith and you do such and such, then you are a liar - pretty strong words here. And, there is so much more! So, we don't do good deeds in order to earn our salvation or to be deserving of salvation, but we do good deeds out of obedience to God. Now, this is really where the rubber meets the road. You can be a "good deed doer" and not be in a genuine relationship with Christ. But, you can't be in a genuine relationship with Christ and not do good deeds. That is what the Bible says in numerous places, not just one. Genuine faith is evidenced by our actions, and our actions can be summed up in our obedience to God.

This now takes us back to the original question. What is the real dividing point between "lukewarm" and, for the sake of this discussion "on fire" for God? (I do agree that the "hot" and "cold" interpretations have validity but I want to research that more before making a definite conclusion on the meaning of "cold.") I don't believe genuine faith has to do with a certain level of "good deeds" but it is rather a heart issue before God. It also has to do with "lifestyle," not with specific, individual sins. The point is, we will still sin, but the point is also, were we ever transformed by the mighty working power of the Holy Spirit in our lives? Did we ever repent of our sin and turn to God? Are our lives exemplified by obedience to God, not perfectly, or are our lives examples of living according to our flesh? I John states that if we say we walk in fellowship with God yet we continue to walk in darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. So, the whole issue, I believe, has to do with our "walk" not just our "talk."

The bottom line here, I believe, is that God is calling us to live lives that are fruitful, that are obedient, that are in service to our Lord. In fact, do a word search on the word "fruit" in the NT and read the verses in context. In most every case, if not in all, there is some kind of "judgment" or "discipline" promised by God to those who do not bear fruit. I see this consistently throughout the NT. What "spit you out of my mouth" means is debatable, as I earlier stated, but I don't want it, whatever it is. I want to live a life that is obedient to God in every way. Will I fail? Most certainly! But, I think what is really essential here is that I humble myself before God in repentance and I keep going. I think it is important that I desire to follow God. I believe God wants so much more from us than what we often give him, and we will suffer in one way or another for not having given our all to him. I don't want to be lukewarm, not just because I'm afraid of the consequences, but because I love God with all my heart and I want to live a life that is "on fire" for him. I want to be refreshing (cold) to others and I want to be healing (hot) to others, too, but I want a life that will cry out for God with the rocks, even if no one else does.

[st. Worm]

It seems clear we are not going to get anywhere with this in terms of convincing each other. I believe I have incorporated into my various posts why I have treated the passage as I have. Obviously the main one is that I definitely distinguish the church from the individual. If you choose not to see or acknowledge my reasoning or that I have attempted to give my reasons so be it.

I do have another question for those who so vehemently disagree with me. I would be interested in knowing your church affiliation. Would you say you are:

Roman Catholic

Lutheran or Reformed

Baptist or affiliated with a credo baptist church

Other (please share)

home church

no church

Thanks for your response if you choose to give one and I meant no offense to anyone.

SW

[Guest shiloh357]

It seems clear we are not going to get anywhere with this in terms of convincing each other. I believe I have incorporated into my various posts why I have treated the passage as I have. Obviously the main one is that I definitely distinguish the church from the individual. If you choose not to see or acknowledge my reasoning or that I have attempted to give my reasons so be it.

I do have another question for those who so vehemently disagree with me. I would be interested in knowing your church affiliation. Would you say you are:

Roman Catholic

Lutheran or Reformed

Baptist or affiliated with a credo baptist church

Other (please share)

home church

no church

Thanks for your response if you choose to give one and I meant no offense to anyone.

SW

the only reason we are not going anywhere is that you have yet to offer ANY substantive reason why we are "stretching" anything. That is all we asked of you, and you keep avoiding the question. You have offered no exegetical treatment of the passage, demonstrated NO principle of interpretation to support your view, you have offered nothing and then act as if we are unconvincable. You have offered nothing for us to disagree with. It is just more evasiveness. Our denominational affiliation is irrelavent.

[apothanein kerdos]

f you choose not to see or acknowledge my reasoning or that I have attempted to give my reasons so be it.

Prove that you have given such a resoning. Quote it. I have looked over this topic 6 times now and have yet to see where you gave reasoning. You attacked, and said, "Nope, that's wrong' but NEVER gave a reasoning as to why it was wrong. You lack analysis.

As for my denomination, it doesn't matter. I've read to many books and studied under so many different denominational paradigms that it's imposisble to pigeon-hole me into a belief system to make yourself feel comfortable. "Oh he's baptist/lutheran/roman Catholic/etc so I don't need to listen to him." No, I have studed extensively, so pigeon-holing me won't do you any good.

Now, prove you have provided analysis. All I'm asking you to do is quote it.

[Christ's Free Servant]

It doesn't seem to matter whether you show someone what proper interpretation of Scripture is or not. I'm beginning to think that people just don't want to know the truth. They'd rather cling to tradition and what they've been taught, because it's familiar I suppose. It's very discouraging. What happened to people who didn't believe everything they were fed? Where are the believers who test things, question and apply logic and reason to faith? Why do christians these days hold analogies, acronyms, bumper sticker theology and cute little sayings over what the Scripture actually teaches? Grrrr....

Tess,

Don't be too quick to judge. If someone is hearing this "hot" and "cold" thing for the first time, he or she needs time to digest it and to make a judgment based upon not only what is being said here, but also upon his or her own research. That takes time. I don't dispute what is being said about "cold", for instance, but rather I think it has merit. It seems to make sense. I think it makes a lot of good sense, in fact, but I'd like to research it myself before making a decision. Others here have responded to my original question as to what they think it means, perhaps without reading the other responses first, or perhaps because it is what they have always believed, but don't assume they are not open-minded because that is their initial response. That is the whole purpose of discussion, afterall. We exchange ideas here and sometimes we come to different conclusions than we began with when it is all over. I am still learning, even in my "old" age. Yes,, some will come in with preconceived ideas and will not be willing to listen, but I think most people on this thread are in agreement. I've enjoyed very much the exchange of ideas, for it is helping me to expand my understanding of the passage and how it can be applied to my life. And, even if we end up disagreeing with one another to one extent or another, that is ok, in fact, it is healthy because it makes us think about what we believe and why we believe it. So, even disagreements are a good thing if they are done with the right attitude. Remember, even the great theologians do not agree on what "the Scripture actually teaches," so how can we, mere mortals, agree?

[st. Worm]

"As for my denomination, it doesn't matter. I've read to many books and studied under so many different denominational paradigms that it's imposisble to pigeon-hole me into a belief system to make yourself feel comfortable. "Oh he's baptist/lutheran/roman Catholic/etc so I don't need to listen to him." No, I have studed extensively, so pigeon-holing me won't do you any good."

Wow I did not know I was interacting with such a distinguished father of the church. I guess I should show more respect for such a learned servant of Christ. Please forgive me dear one! Sorry for daring to even inquire. Obviously you have no need for a church. You are the all knowing one. Amen!

[st. Worm]

'the only reason we are not going anywhere is that you have yet to offer ANY substantive reason why we are "stretching" anything."

Ok, I give. I have shown nothing (not really but I will play). Now please feel free to tell me why you interpret it the way you do. PLEASE!!!!

[apothanein kerdos]

"As for my denomination, it doesn't matter. I've read to many books and studied under so many different denominational paradigms that it's imposisble to pigeon-hole me into a belief system to make yourself feel comfortable. "Oh he's baptist/lutheran/roman Catholic/etc so I don't need to listen to him." No, I have studed extensively, so pigeon-holing me won't do you any good."

Wow I did not know I was interacting with such a distinguished father of the church. I guess I should show more respect for such a learned servant of Christ. Please forgive me dear one! Sorry for daring to even inquire. Obviously you have no need for a church. You are the all knowing one. Amen!

I'm still waiting for your previous analysis as to where you explained your position. Is this all you're capable of? Attacking people?

[apothanein kerdos]

'the only reason we are not going anywhere is that you have yet to offer ANY substantive reason why we are "stretching" anything."

Ok, I give. I have shown nothing (not really but I will play). Now please feel free to tell me why you interpret it the way you do. PLEASE!!!!

NO. You need to provide a reason because you haven't yet. QUOTE WHERE YOU GAVE ANALYSIS (bolded for emphasis). You're wasting our time on a very good discussion. Poop or get off the pot.

[Christ's Free Servant]

So I think to follow these instructions and warnings would be first and foremost to ensure that our Churches are not lukewarm, we can do that by not being lukewarm ourselves and by working to improve the visible Church. Churches can be weighted down by the non-spiritual, some is necessary business sometimes the mundane really is necessary for the spiritual, some things however I think lead us away from our true mission which must always be held before us in the church.

Smalcald,

I think you have hit the nail on the head here in your opening sentence of this paragraph. Churches are made up of people. The church is called a body and individuals are called "parts." Now, if the "parts" are not working properly, then the body as a whole does not work properly. So, you have to first fix the parts, right? Once the parts are fixed, then the body would naturally work right. You wouldn't have to "ensure that our churches are not lukewarm" because the parts would not be lukewarm so the whole would not be lukewarm. It works like this, I think. If one part gets the message about not being luke warm then it rubs off on the other parts and then soon the whole body is whole. But, sometimes the rest of the body doesn't want to move out of their lukewarmness. And, if that is the case, there is nothing you can do to get them moved in the right direction. Only God can move their hearts to repentance. So, if we can't change one another but can only share the truth in hopes others will change, then all we can change is ourselves, which then brings it back to a message for individuals. I do believe, however, that God will judge certain churches who have had a practice of lukewarmness and they will no longer be fruitful and useful for his purposes and some of them may even just die out all together. But, since churches are made up of individuals, I do believe the principle applies to individuals, especially since the passage goes on to speak to individuals when it says that the Lord rebukes and disciplines those he loves and he says he is standing at the door and if anyone, meaning any one individual lukewarm Christian would hear his voice and would enter into fellowship with him, then he would enter into fellowship back with him or her. I believe the passage, thus, serves a dual purpose of chastising the church as a whole for its lukewarmness and promises discipline for her in her unrepentant state, but it also is a message for individual believers to move out of complacency into a walk of genuine faith and obedience - the reward being a sweet fellowship with Christ himself.