What do you believe in?

[miamited]

Hi Robert,

I'm sorry for your struggles. You wrote: Problem is the Bible says no where that fallen man has a free will as much as I would like to believe that he does.

Well, if by that you mean that after reading through the Scriptures you can't find this exact statement: "Man has free will.", then, yes, I'd agree with you. But if by that you mean that you can't find anywhere in the Scriptures that speaks to our having free will, I'd have to say you should brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

Here's just one:
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."

Oh, and another:
Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty."

Oh, and maybe a couple more:
"I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life"

"I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;..."

Then Jesus cried out, "When a man believes in me, he does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me."

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest."

Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me."

Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."

You see, friend, in every one of these statements made by the Lord himself, there is no coercion. No, "those who are predestined". No, nothing but plain and simple, "If you have faith..." Anyway, you are of course free to teach whatever seems right to you.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[98cwitr]

Hi Robert,

I'm sorry for your struggles. You wrote: Problem is the Bible says no where that fallen man has a free will as much as I would like to believe that he does.

Well, if by that you mean that after reading through the Scriptures you can't find this exact statement: "Man has free will.", then, yes, I'd agree with you. But if by that you mean that you can't find anywhere in the Scriptures that speaks to our having free will, I'd have to say you should brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

Here's just one:
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."

Oh, and another:
Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty."

Oh, and maybe a couple more:
"I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life"

"I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;..."

Then Jesus cried out, "When a man believes in me, he does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me."

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest."

Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me."

Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."

You see, friend, in every one of these statements made by the Lord himself, there is no coercion. No, "those who are predestined". No, nothing but plain and simple, "If you have faith..." Anyway, you are of course free to teach whatever seems right to you.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Then do you force yourself to ignore the passages that explicitly speak about predestination?

Then I have to ask...where does faith that concludes upon salvation come from? Does one will themself to believe? These are close ended questions btw.....

 

[GrayAngel]

I knew this would turn into a debate thread eventually. But it was nice while it lasted...

Hi Robert,

I'm sorry for your struggles. You wrote: Problem is the Bible says no where that fallen man has a free will as much as I would like to believe that he does.

Well, if by that you mean that after reading through the Scriptures you can't find this exact statement: "Man has free will.", then, yes, I'd agree with you. But if by that you mean that you can't find anywhere in the Scriptures that speaks to our having free will, I'd have to say you should brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

Here's just one:
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."

Oh, and another:
Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty."

Oh, and maybe a couple more:
"I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life"

"I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;..."

Then Jesus cried out, "When a man believes in me, he does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me."

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest."

Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me."

Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."

You see, friend, in every one of these statements made by the Lord himself, there is no coercion. No, "those who are predestined". No, nothing but plain and simple, "If you have faith..." Anyway, you are of course free to teach whatever seems right to you.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

There's nothing about free will in there. Yes, those who believe are saved, but how does faith grow? The Bible says that God is the author of our faith. He selected us before time began.
Romans 8:28-30 - And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:11-12 - 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.

It also says that God hardened the hearts of many of the people He spoke to so that they would not understand and be saved:

John 12:39-40 - For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:

“He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts,
so they can neither see with their eyes,
nor understand with their hearts,
nor turn—and I would heal them.”

 

[dies-l]

It's not that "the Bible doesn't say X" it's that the Bible contradicts the very concept of free will. It's made up because people equate "genuine love" with the possession of free will. They then conclude that if God really does love people, free will must be true. Unfortunately, this is not the case at all.

Except, as others have demonstrated, the Bible does not contradict free will at all. In fact, it seems to accept it as a given.

 

[RobertZ]

But if by that you mean that you can't find anywhere in the Scriptures that speaks to our having free will, I'd have to say you should brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

My reading comprehension is just fine Ted, the difference between you and I is that you are missing the big picture by failing to take into account the entire word of God and instead relying on a select few scriptures which btw when used in their full and correct context have nothing to do with the free will of man. I could easily do the same thing with certain select scriptures and say "hey look see your wrong!" but I choose not to do that and instead rely on the complete word of God to get the final picture and when I do that I see a God who is completely sovereign over everything including our choices.

 

[RobertZ]

Then do you force yourself to ignore the passages that explicitly speak about predestination?

Then I have to ask...where does faith that concludes upon salvation come from? Does one will themself to believe? These are close ended questions btw.....

Exactly.

 

[RobertZ]

I knew this would turn into a debate thread eventually. But it was nice while it lasted...



There's nothing about free will in there. Yes, those who believe are saved, but how does faith grow? The Bible says that God is the author of our faith. He selected us before time began.
Romans 8:28-30 - And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:11-12 - 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.

It also says that God hardened the hearts of many of the people He spoke to so that they would not understand and be saved:

John 12:39-40 - For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:

“He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts,
so they can neither see with their eyes,
nor understand with their hearts,
nor turn—and I would heal them.”

Again, thank you.

 

[RobertZ]

Obviously, Arminianism, when it speaks of election, speaks of it as conditional. Arminianism will not say that God elects, and therefore we believe; but it says that God elects those whom He foresees will believe. Arminianism maintains that election is dependent ultimately upon a positive response by man. When man accepts Christ, and perseveres in that, then God says, "I will elect you." Perhaps this idea of Arminianism can be illustrated. Suppose one were to place before you a weight of 1,000 pounds and were to command you to lift that 1,000 pound weight above your head. You would rightly say, "I can not." But were one to erect a system of pulleys with a rope, attach the rope firmly to that weight, then say again, "Lift that weight," now you would no longer be able to say, "I can not." Rather, you must now say either, "I will," or, "I won't." Obviously, it is now within your power to lift that weight. It is in this way that the Arminian also views the sinner. When man fell, he could do nothing. He could not accept Christ. He could not believe. But then God bestowed upon all men a certain grace (comparable to the system of pulleys in the illustration), so that all men have within them the power to believe if they will. But if they refuse, they are forever lost.

What must one say of this teaching of Arminianism? It ought to be clear that Arminianism essentially denies the sovereignty of God.
That God is Sovereign means simply that God is God: He rules over heaven and earth. He will never relinquish His power to any creature. He will direct all things according to His sovereign purpose. God rules. The view of Arminianism denies this. An Arminian will insist that he too believes that the sinner is saved only by grace. But do not overlook the fact that, according to Arminianism, every sinner has this grace of God. What then makes one man to differ from another? Not God's grace, but the will of man which either uses or refuses God's grace. One exercises his will for Christ, another against Christ. The final determination as to who is elect rests then upon man's act. Such a teaching denies the sovereignty of God, for then the Sovereign, infinite, eternal God must sit in His heavens and await the decision of m an in order to find out who will and who will not inherit His Kingdom. That is a terrible error.

Calvinism insists upon the Scriptural truth that God unconditionally elects a people unto Himself from all eternity. Not only John Calvin, but also the earlier church fathers, insisted upon the same thing. St. Augustine, 354-420, maintained that: "Faith, therefore, from its beginning to its perfection is the gift of God. And that this gift is bestowed on some and not on others, who will deny but he who would fight against the most manifest testimonies of the Scripture? But why faith is not given to all ought not to concern the believer, who knows that all men by the sin of one came into must just condemnation. But why God delivers one from condemnation and not another belongs to His inscrutable judgments. And 'His ways are past finding out.' And if it be investigated and inquired how it is that each receiver of faith is deemed of God worthy to receive such a gift, there are not wanting those who will say, 'It is by their human will.' But we say that it is by grace, or Divine predestination."

Augustine's view was firmly founded on Scripture. Throughout, Scripture teaches that election is not conditioned upon any work or act of man. Acts 13:48 states, "For as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed." Now, which is first: belief or ordination? Plainly the latter. Or we read in John 15:16: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you, that you should go forth and bring forth fruit...." And in I John 4:10: "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." Election is surely unconditional according to all the teachings of Scripture.
Do you find comfort in such a truth? Some have insisted that this doctrine provides no comfort. For, say some, if one believes election, then the result will be that he becomes very careless and profane on this earth. If God eternally determined that a person is going to heaven, then what difference does it make what he does? If he wants to sin, he will be saved regardless. Though he do no good works, he will be saved anyway. Thus have many falsely presented this truth of election!

But such is a distortion of this doctrine. It is true: God has freely, eternally, sovereignly determined that His people will enter into glory. Among that people is numbered the thief on the cross -- a most horrible sinner. Among them is numbered Peter who denied Christ three times. Among them is numbered ourselves -- also terrible sinners. But does the doctrine of election allow one to sin if he pleases? Scripture teaches that God has chosen us in order that we should be holy and without blame (Eph. 1:4). See also Ephesians 2:10. Election produces fruit: where there is no fruit of righteousness, there is no evidence of election. Woe to the person who dares to say, "I sin because it does not make any difference -- I am already either elect or reprobate." To paraphrase words of Christ, it will be more tolerable in the day of judgment for one who never knew the truth of election, than for one who knew it and used it as an excuse to sin!

The sad situation today is that many Reformed men what to hide this doctrine. These insist that it is too difficult for the common people -- and one surely must never speak of it on the mission field. But Scripture never hides the truth of election -- it is plainly taught. In fact, Paul writes of it in detail to the churches of Rome and Ephesus especially. These churches were composed largely of Gentiles who had never had contact with the Word of God before. They were taught of election. If it was not too difficult then, ought it to be too difficult today for the people of our educated society?

How about yourself? Are you one of God's elect? That question has troubled many people.
Are you concerned about your election -- truly concerned? The reprobate wicked never care whether or not they are elect. These only deny all of God's Word. But if you are concerned about your election, then you give evidence already in your life and heart of the fruit of election.

Just a few more questions. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? Do you love His church and His truth? Do you hate all of your own sin? Then there is really no question, is there? You see within you the fruit and proof of election. You are still a sinner as are all God's people. Sometimes we wonder, "How could God choose one such as I?" Yet the fruits of election are evident. If you believe, you have the evidence that God has eternally chosen you in Christ. He did not choose you because you believe, but your belief is the evidence and proof that He has chosen you. Do you believe? Then blessed are you, for yours too is the kingdom of heaven.

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_43.html

Proverbs 16:9
In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.

 

[GrayAngel]

Obviously, Arminianism, when it speaks of election, speaks of it as conditional. Arminianism will not say that God elects, and therefore we believe; but it says that God elects those whom He foresees will believe. Arminianism maintains that election is dependent ultimately upon a positive response by man. When man accepts Christ, and perseveres in that, then God says, "I will elect you." Perhaps this idea of Arminianism can be illustrated. Suppose one were to place before you a weight of 1,000 pounds and were to command you to lift that 1,000 pound weight above your head. You would rightly say, "I can not." But were one to erect a system of pulleys with a rope, attach the rope firmly to that weight, then say again, "Lift that weight," now you would no longer be able to say, "I can not." Rather, you must now say either, "I will," or, "I won't." Obviously, it is now within your power to lift that weight. It is in this way that the Arminian also views the sinner. When man fell, he could do nothing. He could not accept Christ. He could not believe. But then God bestowed upon all men a certain grace (comparable to the system of pulleys in the illustration), so that all men have within them the power to believe if they will. But if they refuse, they are forever lost.

What must one say of this teaching of Arminianism? It ought to be clear that Arminianism essentially denies the sovereignty of God.
That God is Sovereign means simply that God is God: He rules over heaven and earth. He will never relinquish His power to any creature. He will direct all things according to His sovereign purpose. God rules. The view of Arminianism denies this. An Arminian will insist that he too believes that the sinner is saved only by grace. But do not overlook the fact that, according to Arminianism, every sinner has this grace of God. What then makes one man to differ from another? Not God's grace, but the will of man which either uses or refuses God's grace. One exercises his will for Christ, another against Christ. The final determination as to who is elect rests then upon man's act. Such a teaching denies the sovereignty of God, for then the Sovereign, infinite, eternal God must sit in His heavens and await the decision of man in order to find out who will and who will not inherit His Kingdom. That is a terrible error.

Calvinism insists upon the Scriptural truth that God unconditionally elects a people unto Himself from all eternity. Not only John Calvin, but also the earlier church fathers, insisted upon the same thing. St. Augustine, 354-420, maintained that: "Faith, therefore, from its beginning to its perfection is the gift of God. And that this gift is bestowed on some and not on others, who will deny but he who would fight against the most manifest testimonies of the Scripture? But why faith is not given to all ought not to concern the believer, who knows that all men by the sin of one came into must just condemnation. But why God delivers one from condemnation and not another belongs to His inscrutable judgments. And 'His ways are past finding out.' And if it be investigated and inquired how it is that each receiver of faith is deemed of God worthy to receive such a gift, there are not wanting those who will say, 'It is by their human will.' But we say that it is by grace, or Divine predestination."

Augustine's view was firmly founded on Scripture. Throughout, Scripture teaches that election is not conditioned upon any work or act of man. Acts 13:48 states, "For as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed." Now, which is first: belief or ordination? Plainly the latter. Or we read in John 15:16: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you, that you should go forth and bring forth fruit...." And in I John 4:10: "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." Election is surely unconditional according to all the teachings of Scripture.
Do you find comfort in such a truth? Some have insisted that this doctrine provides no comfort. For, say some, if one believes election, then the result will be that he becomes very careless and profane on this earth. If God eternally determined that a person is going to heaven, then what difference does it make what he does? If he wants to sin, he will be saved regardless. Though he do no good works, he will be saved anyway. Thus have many falsely presented this truth of election!

But such is a distortion of this doctrine. It is true: God has freely, eternally, sovereignly determined that His people will enter into glory. Among that people is numbered the thief on the cross -- a most horrible sinner. Among them is numbered Peter who denied Christ three times. Among them is numbered ourselves -- also terrible sinners. But does the doctrine of election allow one to sin if he pleases? Scripture teaches that God has chosen us in order that we should be holy and without blame (Eph. 1:4). See also Ephesians 2:10. Election produces fruit: where there is no fruit of righteousness, there is no evidence of election. Woe to the person who dares to say, "I sin because it does not make any difference -- I am already either elect or reprobate." To paraphrase words of Christ, it will be more tolerable in the day of judgment for one who never knew the truth of election, than for one who knew it and used it as an excuse to sin!

The sad situation today is that many Reformed men what to hide this doctrine. These insist that it is too difficult for the common people -- and one surely must never speak of it on the mission field. But Scripture never hides the truth of election -- it is plainly taught. In fact, Paul writes of it in detail to the churches of Rome and Ephesus especially. These churches were composed largely of Gentiles who had never had contact with the Word of God before. They were taught of election. If it was not too difficult then, ought it to be too difficult today for the people of our educated society?

How about yourself? Are you one of God's elect? That question has troubled many people.
Are you concerned about your election -- truly concerned? The reprobate wicked never care whether or not they are elect. These only deny all of God's Word. But if you are concerned about your election, then you give evidence already in your life and heart of the fruit of election.

Just a few more questions. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? Do you love His church and His truth? Do you hate all of your own sin? Then there is really no question, is there? You see within you the fruit and proof of election. You are still a sinner as are all God's people. Sometimes we wonder, "How could God choose one such as I?" Yet the fruits of election are evident. If you believe, you have the evidence that God has eternally chosen you in Christ. He did not choose you because you believe, but your belief is the evidence and proof that He has chosen you. Do you believe? Then blessed are you, for yours too is the kingdom of heaven.

Sovereign Election

Proverbs 16:9
In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.

A very good post. Very thorough. I have to say, Arminianism doesn't make the least bit of sense to me. How could we be elected if we were the ones who chose God? This view of faith seems a lot like a game of ping pong.

God calls us, we believe, He elects us. God calls us, we don't believe, God hardens our hearts so we...don't believe.

What does election even mean in this view? From what you described, it seems more like acknowledgement than election. When someone chooses you out of a lineup, that's election. You don't become President of the USA and THEN get elected.

 

[RobertZ]

A very good post. Very thorough. I have to say, Arminianism doesn't make the least bit of sense to me. How could we be elected if we were the ones who chose God? This view of faith seems a lot like a game of ping pong.

God calls us, we believe, He elects us. God calls us, we don't believe, God hardens our hearts so we...don't believe.

What does election even mean in this view? From what you described, it seems more like acknowledgement than election. When someone chooses you out of a lineup, that's election. You don't become President of the USA and THEN get elected.

Im glad you found the post helpful but I wanted to make it clear that I posted that from a source but I did include the link to the source in my post in order to give credit to the person who wrote it.

 

[dies-l]

My reading comprehension is just fine Ted, the difference between you and I is that you are missing the big picture by failing to take into account the entire word of God and instead relying on a select few scriptures which btw when used in their full and correct context have nothing to do with the free will of man. I could easily do the same thing with certain select scriptures and say "hey look see your wrong!" but I choose not to do that and instead rely on the complete word of God to get the final picture and when I do that I see a God who is completely sovereign over everything including our choices.

(at both of you). Why must we resort to personal slights when what we really have here is a legitimate disagreement over what boils down to something far less important that Jesus' command that we love one another?

 

[cubinity]

(at both of you). Why must we resort to personal slights when what we really have here is a legitimate disagreement over what boils down to something far less important that Jesus' command that we love one another?

I second that!

 

[98cwitr]

Except, as others have demonstrated, the Bible does not contradict free will at all. In fact, it seems to accept it as a given.

Please reconcile 1 Peter 2:8 with the concept of free will for me then.

I am unable to emphatically believe that free will (as it is defined by the masses) and predestination can co-exist. They simply cannot logically. I believe macro free will is simply a perception.

Let me ask, how do you reconcile predestination and free will?

 

[cubinity]

Please reconcile 1 Peter 2:8 with the concept of free will for me then.

In context, verse 4 reads, "As you come to him..." and verse 7 reads, "Now to you who believe..." and verse 8 reads, "They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for."

If I understand the intention of the Adam and Eve story, along with the meanings of Romans 3:23 and 5:12, then it is reasonable to say that we were all destined to disobey the message.

However, Peter is speaking in the present tense to an audience that has come to him and now believes the message, and is contrasting them in the present with those who continue to stumble.

In the present, after they have been transformed into a new creation, they differ distinctly from those who continue to stumble. Even their destiny has been transformed.

I don't see how this is in conflict with the concept of free will.

 

[If Not For Grace]

Free Will all the way-knowing what's going to happen is not the same thing as pre-destination. My daughter (given a choice) will choose the red balloon over the yellow one every time, I know what she will do, but I don't choose for her.

 

[98cwitr]

In context, verse 4 reads, "As you come to him..." and verse 7 reads, "Now to you who believe..." and verse 8 reads, "They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for."

If I understand the intention of the Adam and Eve story, along with the meanings of Romans 3:23 and 5:12, then it is reasonable to say that we were all destined to disobey the message.

However, Peter is speaking in the present tense to an audience that has come to him and now believes the message, and is contrasting them in the present with those who continue to stumble.

In the present, after they have been transformed into a new creation, they differ distinctly from those who continue to stumble. Even their destiny has been transformed.

I don't see how this is in conflict with the concept of free will.

Doesn't free will imply that people are in control of their stumbling? Doesn't it imply that they can choose to stumble or not?

If they do stumble, and it's not by choice, then who is dictating the stumbling? Romans 5:12, in context of free will, doesn't it (free will) allow for the choice whether to sin or not? I mean...just because sin is in the world, doesn't mean you have to commit it right?

 

[cubinity]

Doesn't free will imply that people are in control of their stumbling? Doesn't it imply that they can choose to stumble or not?

If they do stumble, and it's not by choice, then who is dictating the stumbling? Romans 5:12, in context of free will, doesn't it (free will) allow for the choice whether to sin or not? I mean...just because sin is in the world, doesn't mean you have to commit it right?

Is destiny the antithesis of free-will to you?
If so, that explains why we disagree.
I believe one has free-will even in living up to their destiny, and in failing to live up to it.

I get the impression you read into the passage that it was not their choice to stumble. (Correct me if I am wrong)
I do not see that in the passage.
Maybe it is a preconceived notion you are bringing with you as you read it. (Again, correct me if I am wrong)

 

[98cwitr]

If destiny can be changed then it's not destiny. It's just a plan.

If one fails to achieve their destiny, then they never had a destiny and if that be true then there is no such thing. They only then failed to reach a goal, not a destiny. It's fallible logic and incorrect use of the term to conclude so.

Destiny | Define Destiny at Dictionary.com

They were destined (predetermined, usually inevitable or irresistible, course of events) to stumble, they perceived their choices leading to the consequences of their actions.

If knowing the definition of a word is preconceived...so be it.

 

[cubinity]

Here's my take. "They," referring to those who do not believe, were destined to stumble, and the audience, referring to those who do believe, once also stumbled according to that destiny, and thus one can conclude that we were all destined to stumble, but that the destiny of some, namely those who believe, has changed, just as they have changed, into new creations. Thus, their destiny now differs from the destiny of those who do not believe.

That, however, says nothing about free-will.

For we can see destiny as an inevitable and unchangeable, but in doing so we render God, the all-mighty, incapable of changing the inevitable. I too see destiny as inevitable from our limited control, but not unchangeable when God, who is capable, gives us a new destiny.

I see this author communicating that in our freedom, God has changed our destiny, and is yet to change the destiny of those who currently do not believe.

It is not a condemnation of them, but a present distinction between "they" and the identified audience.

Thus, I am not redefining destiny to believe in free-will, but identifying a supernatural factor that is greater than even my own destiny: God.

 

[rwbyus]

Hi, Question, does it really matter in the scope of things. We are to witness to all because we don't know who will or won't. We are to let his light shine through us, we are bought with a price. It makes for nice debate and it can be a good evening with dueling verses to compare, but in the end it will all be decided in Heaven. Wonder if there are coffee shops to sit around and discuss things.
Worship with like minded people, praise with all.