Love someone into Hell

[rojoloco]

It seems there have become 2 sides to Christianity. One side takes the gentle approach whereas the other side takes the stern approach. Both sides see their message as loving. They just come from 2 different angles.

The point of this thread is to find out if either side is unbiblical. Many say it is unloving to be harsh when speaking the Truth. They say we need to be more loving and gentle and what we are doing is unbiblical because Jesus wants us to show love. Others say if we are too gentle, it waters down the Truth. They say that is unbiblical and we need to proclaim the Truth with power and authority.

This is my take on the matter:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Let's look at the word reproof.

reproof - ἔλεγχος - elegchos
1) a proof, that by which a thing is proved or tested
2) conviction

This alone tells us that Scipture is to convict us. We are to use it to play off of the convictions of others. This is one profitable use. It does not, however, tell us whether it is to be harsh or soft tongued. To get to this, we must look at the root word.

rebuke - ἐλέγχω - elegchō
1) to convict, refute, confute
a) generally with a suggestion of shame of the person convicted
b) by conviction to bring to the light, to expose
2) to find fault with, correct
a) by word
1) to reprehend severely, chide, admonish, reprove
2) to call to account, show one his fault, demand an explanation
b) by deed
1) to chasten, to punish

Elegchō deals with conviction through severe chastening and lecturing. This word was not used in a gentle manner. It was very harsh in nature. This does not mean it is unloving. We are in Christ therefore we know we are to love one another. Paul rebuked his Church on numerous occasions. If someone did that today, many people would claim he was unloving and only pushing people away. This couldn't be further from the truth. Imagine a Bible filled with stories of people using nothing but lifestyle evangelism. How about reading Paul being gentle in his approach to the Corinthians? This just didn't happen. He convicted them and rebuked them harshly but it was in deep love.

The word elegchos comes from this root meaning. 2 Timothy 3:16 gives us the green light to speak harshly if need be but the rest of Scripture ties in by telling us in needs to be done in love. Does this mean the people being gentle are wrong? Of course not. Jesus was gentle in so many of his messages. He was also harsh when he made a ruckus in the temple. Neither is wrong. They are both very useful.

We can be harsh on someone up to the point where they stop listening. Just keep in mind that we can be gentle and love someone straight into Hell because we never spoke the Truth with power and authority as 2 Timothy 3:16 grants us permission to do.

 

[Boanerges]

Just my thoughts:
If I am to be bold and harsh or loving and gentle that should be only by the leading of the Holy Spirit. The Words we speak (like our example Jesus) should be the Father's Words and the works we do should only be what we see Him doing. Like Christ we are to be led of the Spirit and all our works dome in His power at His discretion.
Some come by fear and others by love.
So while I agree we can ignore a prompting from the Holy Spirit to speak strong Words we can also offend someone into running away from the truth. How many of us can remember being a baby Christian and closing open doors to share the Gospel with the bull in the china shop approach?
In my experience it is best to let Him decide.
Many blessings in Jesus Name,
your brother Larry.

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

 

[Mark of Faith]

I agree with the opening post, and also Boanerges' expansion of the necessary traits.

My thoughts are that there is a time and a place, as well as a person, where "harsh" words are required. At other times, soft words are more appropriate.

My minister at church has a wonderful knack (and I don't know if he realises this himself) of being challenging yet comforting. I have been in some churches where it is all challenge. I began to think "well if it's all uphill slog I'm not sure I want it!". I'm sure there are other churches where it is all "soft-soap".

I think that there is a real temptation, and danger, in today's "liberal climate" to go easy on some of the harder doctrines. Yet if I say to someone "believe if you will, don't worry, hell doesn't exist, so if you don't believe just go and get on with your life", that won't make hell any cooler for the poor guy when he gets there.
Yet, if I say "Repent! You're heading for disaster!", one may retort "Judge not, lest you be judged." Though I may come under attack for using strong words, and even the devil may have a dig at my integrity, I will be able to stand before Christ having done the right thing.

Do we please men? Or do we please God?

God bless,
Mark.