Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | mark d seyler | 172384 | ||
Hi John, I have not come to a conclusion, I asked you a question. I feel it's fair to ask you this question before addressing your post, because I perceived you asked a question to which you have a strong opinion of the answer, which a lot of us have wrong, and though you've asked, you actually wish to correct us. "A cherished tradition"?? Cherished by whom? Am I truly just acting on an impulse to "challenge it's detractors"? If you had asked me, I would tell you that I am acting in the interest of finding the heart of this matter. In calling yourself a "detractor", you have verified that you were not actually asking for the purpose of obtaining insight, but rather were asking with an agenda, again, to correct us. Please forgive my bluntness. In spite of the fact that you have not answered my question, I will tell you why I asked, my answer, and why it is relevent. If you believe that salvation is a regenerative work of God done in a person's life before that person has made any move in thought or will towards God, and that any desire to know God or to repent of sin comes only after regeneration, than there is no type of invitation made by man towards God that is relevent. Not "Come into my heart", not "Forgive my sins", or anything else. If you believe, as I do, that God saves the person who says "yes, I want to be saved", regenerating them after they have agreed with God, then what does it really matter what words are said to God (outside of the ridiculous, of course!), whether "come into my heart", or "please forgive me", or something else. I asked you if you think that whether or not we want Jesus to save us has anything to do with our salvation. Your answer to this question would tell me if its the words you object to, or the very thought that a person would be using any words at all. The answer seemed certain, although I try not to make assumptions about people's beliefs. You wrote "A small, but signiicant point is: When one person invites another into one's home, it is the "inviter" who is due the thanks." This seems to be saying that you consider that if we "ask Jesus in", then we get the credit, but if Donald Trump shows up at your door, offering to cover your living room floor with 1000 dollar bills 2 feet deep, would you invite him in? When you were deposting the money in the bank, or your mattress, or wherever you would put it, would you be thinking to yourself that you were responsible for fact that you were now rich? I wouldn't be! I don't think its a correct analogy. But like I said, I wanted to get to the heart of the matter. In John 1:12, we read "but as many as receive Him". "Received" is in the active voice. It is an action done by those numbered in the "many", the one who received Him. It is an action that you and I have done. To them, the ones who have done this action, to them God gave the right be become children of God. So how do we receive Him? What words do we use? Do we use words at all? Jesus spoke of Himself, the Father, and the Holy Spirit being in us. He said "if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in". Granted, we need to confess (agree, say the same) Jesus' lordship (which contains repentence from sin, and commitment to serve - If He is Lord, we do these things), believe God raised Him from the dead (which is faith, a gift from God). But is there a problem if we pray a "sinner's prayer"? I don't know of anyone that uses this who thinks that the words save any more than that baptizing a non-believer saves them. Now, mind you, I am not putting a "sinner's prayer" on par with baptism. An for the record, I personally do not use the "sinners prayer" in evangelizing. Its the change of heart that matters, and God sees that. I am more interested in getting someone started in their relationship with God than the specifics of how they do it, so long as it contains the heart of what the Bible teaches. But I don't think that someone needs to understand a lot of advanced theology to be saved, either. If saying a pray helps someone to frame their thoughts, if saying "I receive You, Jesus, please come into my heart," is a touch-point for their faith, well, these are not words that are foreign to Scripture, they come from Scripture. If I say "I am a sinner - please forgive me Jesus!", well, Luke tells us of the tas collector who said "God be merciful to me a sinner." (18:13) Jesus gave us a commentary on this man's action, his "sinner's prayer". He said, "this man went home justified." Well, I've said enough, and I imagine some might say I've said too much, so I will close. I do not anticipate having anthing else to add to this subject than what I have already said, so I will leave this to others to be debated and discussed. God bless! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
2 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | DocTrinsograce | 172396 | ||
Dear Brother Mark, You wrote, "I don't know of anyone that uses this who thinks that the words save any more than that baptizing a non-believer saves them." There are many Baptist evangelicals that give this very implication to the "sinners prayer." Some even give the impression that walking an aisle will somehow imbue a person with salvific merit. With regard to baptism, there are many groups that view baptism as a key component to receiving saving grace. Those folks range from Roman Catholic to the Campbellite "Church of Christ." In addition -- again very common among my fellow Baptists -- there exists the quite similar error of "decisional regeneration." Now, I certainly don't agree with this sort of thing -- and I know you well enough that you don't either. I'm just pointing out that, if you think about it, you'll see the problem of which our brother writes. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | mark d seyler | 172402 | ||
Hi Doc, See, this is why I should never say I am done with a topic - there is often something to draw me back in! :-) Ok, I will concede your point that there are those who will teach that if you simply mouth these words as a mantra, you are forever saved, no matter what you actually believe or do. I do not personally know any that do, at least to my knowledge. But I would suggest that the problem lies not with the notion that we approach God through prayer, but that Christ crucified is not being preached. (Or that whatever it is that John or you or others feel is missing, is missing) Let us not fault those who, after they have preached the gospel, invite the repentant to pray, and fault what their choice of words may be, but let us rather fault those who claim that salvation is available without repentance and commitment, at the only cost of a puff of breath, sufficient to say a couple of sentences. To continue with the example of baptism, should we then say, since there are so many that teach faulty doctrine of baptism that we should not baptize? Of course not. Now, we do have a lot of different opinions over HOW one is baptized. Immersed, sprinkled, poured, etc., and it seems that we have differing opinions over how one receives Jesus. With this prayer, with that prayer, with no prayer, but neither do we say that one shouldn't receive Jesus. We just want to insure that we know what we are saying as we say it. It is the Bible that says we "receive Him." Its the receiving that is important. I really have little regard for the method, so long, as I have already said, as we are not talking about the ridiculous, or profane. But if John is simply refering to those who would suggest that we "ask Jesus into our heart" without a correct presentation of the Gospel, then that is a different matter than what I have responded to. Love in Christ Mark |
||||||
4 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | DocTrinsograce | 172406 | ||
Dear Brother Mark, You wrote, "Let us not...fault what their choice of words may be..." By what other means is the Gospel conveyed (Romans 10:17)? By what other means ought we to be certain that we, ourselves, are rightly proclaiming the Gospel? It was God, Himself, who chose preaching as the means of conveying the Gospel (1 Corinthians 1:21). We are accursed if we should preach anything other than the Gospel as given us by Christ and the apostles (Galatians 1:8-9). I concur with the gist of your post. I do not mean to quarrel with you. But if our words do not matter, then we are foolish to attempt communication at all. I know no other way to rightly divide the Word (1 Timothy 2:5) than through the use of words. (This is the very heart of the doctrine of the verbal plenary inspiration of the Scriptures.) In Him, Doc |
||||||
5 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | Ocelot | 172407 | ||
Hi Doc, This may very well not be my place to speak. But I would point out that you left the key part of what Mark said, out of your quote. He said “Let us not fault those who, AFTER they have preached the gospel, invite the repentant to pray, and fault what their choice of words may be” Just thought I’d point that out. In Christian Love, Ocelot |
||||||
6 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | DocTrinsograce | 172408 | ||
Good observation, Ocelot. Thank you! I must have "tunnel visioned" there for a moment. :-) Obviously, if they have, indeed, preached the Gospel, they will have conveyed it rightly through the use of words! Sorry, Brother Mark! That tunnel vision thing is sure a bad habit... especially when I do it while emphasizing the importance of our words! Whew! |
||||||
7 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | mark d seyler | 172412 | ||
Not a problem, Doc! Sometimes I feel like I am bumping around in a tree filled with forests. But thing of it is, I suspect we have gone far afield of what John Hobbs initially intended - I suspect! So have we have concluded then that after a Scriptural presentation of the Gospel, none of us would have a problem with "inviting Jesus into our hearts"? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
8 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | DocTrinsograce | 172419 | ||
Dear Brother Mark, Well, I'll only say that if Christ and the apostles would have said it, then we need not fear to say it. It would be a valuable study to learn how the Gospel is presented in each instance in the New Testament. I often find it difficult to think outside of the practices that have been handed down through our history in American Evangelicalism. Yet we are given the actual text of the preaching of Christ and the apostles from which to learn. In Him, Doc |
||||||
9 | Are we presenting the gospel scripturaly | John 1:12 | mark d seyler | 172421 | ||
Hi Doc, In Acts 2, the crowd asked Peter "what shall we do?" Peter answered "Repent and be baptized". Did they say anything to announce their repentance? Its not recorded. Whether they nodded their heads, or said a prayer, or shouted together in unison "This we will do!" is not recorded. In Rev. 3:10, I would ask what is the door that Jesus is knocking on, and what would the proper response be? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||