For or against the altar call and sinner’s prayer?

Note: jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer

For the altar call

Rescuing the Perishing: A Defense of Giving Invitations, by Ken Keathley, Assistant Professor of Theology, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

Often the charge is made that nothing like the modern invitation can be found in the Scriptures. This is at best an argument from silence. Neither ushers nor the pews in which they seat people; neither offertories nor the organs on which they are played; nor most of the various components of a modern worship service can be found explicitly in the Bible. In fact, some would say that the Sunday morning worship service itself is not in the Scriptures. If the Bible is silent about giving an invitation, then the burden of proof is on those who say that invitations violate Biblical principles. (Actually, this is exactly the line of argument used by those who would forbid the use of hymns or musical instruments in church services.)

However, there is abundant Scriptural justification for the practice of giving public invitations. In both the Old and New Testament there are numerous examples of the hearers of God’s message being challenged to make an open and public decision.

From John the Baptist to John the Revelator, the New Testament also provides justification for giving public invitations. Our Lord confronted the disciples with a clear call to follow Him. To all He says, “Come to Me, all you who labor” (Matt. 11:28). The Canon closes with the offer: “And the Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come!’ and let him who hears say, ‘Come!’ And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17). Repeatedly in the New Testament the invitation is given for all “to come.”

Certain words used in Scripture to describe evangelistic preaching provide a strong warrant for public invitations. After Peter preached his powerful sermon on the Day of Pentecost, the Bible says that he then “exhorted them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse generation.’” (Acts 2:40) The word translated “exhort” is parakaleo, which could be translated “invite,” for it is a call for the hearer to come and take his stand with the speaker. Peter gives us a clear example of one whom at the end of his message invited the listeners to make a public decision. (Read the complete article)

Evangelistic Invitations, by Dr. Edward Watke Jr., Revival in the Home Ministries

WHY GIVE INVITATIONS?

Invitations are normally a culmination of a message. The drive or appeal of evangelistic preaching demands a logical climax to its appeal.

Without an invitation, preaching would be incomplete and the effect unknown.

Invitations are an exalted form of persuasion. The burden of the message or sermon is not finished until the invitation is given.

Here often the most energy and compassion is demanded in comparison to the message content itself.

A. They are Biblical:

1. The Bible is full of appeals, exhortations, entreaties, or pleadings.

2. Example: Gen 3:9 “Where art thou, Adam”? Exod. 32:36 “Who is on the Lord’s side?” Consider further Deut. 30:19-20, 31:11-13; and Isaiah 1:18.

3. In the New Testament we have the following list of Christ’s appeals, among many: Matt. 11:28-30; Matt 4:19; Lk 14:16-23

4. Paul and the other apostles wrote about persuading men: Acts 2:38-40; 10:48; 16:30-31; 26: 22-29; II Cor. 5:10-20

• It is true that in modern times giving invitations publicly came into use in Finney’s and Moody’s day. For many years the inquiry room and anxious seat were used, as they were called.
• We are told to go and make disciples of all men, (Matt. 28:18-20) this requires laboring to get decisions and giving invitations whether public or private. I think it is evident that Christ expects us to give invitations.
• In the business world salesmen expect results from their appeals as they work at impressing the potential buyer.
• In good, soul winning, fundamental churches invitations are expected by the person in the pew. In fact in many cases if the pastor or evangelist did not give invitations regularly the people would be very concerned.

B. They are Logical:

1. Sermons are for the purpose of winning people to Christ, moving them toward maturity, growth and godliness, and enlisting them for service for God’s glory.

2. Good churches make every effort to create an atmosphere for decisions. What place is better than at the end of a powerful, Scriptural sermon?

3. The inclinations toward decisions wane quickly when conviction passes away. When the impulse is strong to deal with needs - that is when the person needs to move toward a decision. This is the end purpose of an invitation.

4. We live in a day of skillful, high-pressure advertising. People are accustomed to appeals or solicitations to see or to buy. The masses are invitation-minded because they are readily asked to sign on the dotted line.

5. In the fundamental, Baptist church people are educated to expect invitations at the close of the gospel message. Saved and unsaved alike must have opportunity given to them to make decisions.

C. They Appeal to the Will of the Individual:

1. As we see how God made man, we would note that giving invitations would be normal and fitting within the scope of man’s nature.

2. When emotions are aroused (man is an emotional being) desires are stirred that soon pass away unless acted upon. The person generally needs an invitation to help him make the right use of the conviction of that moment.

3. Good impulses are harder to generate the second time than the first time.

4. When emotions are stirred up by the Holy Spirit’s work and no outlet is given for action the people become used to being moved without response. This is damaging and renders the people more and more indifferent.

5. Invitations are generally made when there is a favorable mood, a convicting environment, and God is at work in the heart.

D. They are Practical:

1. They are the justified end to accomplish the gospel call, to win men to Christ at the earliest moment.

2. Today every outstanding evangelist uses them.

3. People need definite, vital Christian experience. Many lack assurance of salvation for they don’t recall the time when they made a definite transaction with God. Evangelistic invitations bring them to the crisis of committal or decision.

4. Often the lost move when they see others move out in decisions. When Christians are willing, regularly, to do business with God at the altar then the unsaved are far more apt to also move forward for decision making.

5. Invitations have been proven to increase the number of conversions, and additions to a Church.

E. They will be Honored:

1. Invitations will be rewarded in the hearts of the saved who have prayed for the unsaved to come to Christ.

2. Some of a church’s layfolk will have been under the burden of concern for the lost. Invitations well-given and acted upon will bring great rejoicing to the hearts of the saved who love the Lord and the lost.

3. There is joyous anticipation that the Holy Spirit will honor the message, the testimony of the saved, and the intercession for the lost.

4. Often the unsaved consciously or unconsciously expect invitations at the end of sermons. They may not be ready to act, but they may admit they are thankful that there is concern for them.

5. Invitations are honored by the Holy Spirit, who also bears witness to the truth and is the One who moves on the heart of the lost and the Christian alike. (Jh.15:26-27) Read the complete article

In Defense of the Invitation / Altar Call, by Kevin Jackson (Society of Evangelical Arminians)

Arminian churches typically utilize altar calls more frequently than Calvinist churches do. Why is this so? First, Arminians believe in prevenient grace - that God is working in the hearts of non-believers to draw them to Himself. Second, Arminians believe that God desires for everyone to be saved. Thus, every non-believer is a genuine candidate for the saving grace of God. Third, many Arminian and Semi-Arminian denominations are “low church”. Low church worship services tend to be more expressive and less formal than those of older and more established denominations. Given these reasons, it should be expected that Arminian leaning denominations would be more likely to utilize the public invitation to accept Christ.

While altar calls are not specifically mentioned, public invitations to accept Christ were frequently made by many of the disciples, including Peter and Paul. An altar call is a public invitation to accept Christ. It can be used in a manner that strongly affirms scripture. Here are some examples:

Altar calls are used to proclaim the good news of Jesus. In Mark 16:15 Jesus said to “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation.”

Altar calls are used to exhort repentance. In Acts 17 Paul makes a public invitation to the Athenians to accept Christ. In Acts 17:30 Paul states that “...(God) commands all people everywhere to repent.”

Altar calls are an opportunity for new believers to publicly acknowledge their faith in Christ. Jesus called for his disciples to follow him publicly. Matthew 10:32-33 states that “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.”

An altar is a place where one can openly confess sins. 1 John 1:9 states that “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (Read the complete article)

NO, NO I WON’T GO! Is it time to drop the altar call? by Keith Drury

I believe God created human beings with “free will,” -- that is, the freedom to make personal decisions. In the Garden, Adam & Eve used their free will to decide to disobey God. Enter depravity. That is, then human will from then onward has been depraved, or bent toward sin. Our depraved will, though still free, is biased toward disobedience. As Augustine observed, we may be free to do right, but we seem freer to chose wrong. So, with such a darkened nature, how could we ever find God? Enter God’s grace -- the grace which precedes conversion, enlightening and drawing our heart toward Him.

When we decide to come to God we experience saving grace. God’s plan of salvation includes a provision for my personal decision. -- to believe, confess, repent, and receive -- all acts which spring from our will. The human will is critical for conversion. Though the decision does not save us, the decision in critical in our salvation. The will is also critical in our sanctification. God does not make us holy automatically and without our cooperation and submission.

The sanctification of God’s people involves commitment, surrender, consecration and seeking, again, all acts of the will. (The theological part is almost over, be patient.)

So, why do I keep giving altar calls? Because I keep calling for a decision in my preaching. And the altar call is one good way to “put the question” for decision. The decision they make will be critical to the conversion of sinners and the sanctification of believers. So I keep preaching for a verdict and calling for decision. And the altar call still works (almost) everywhere I go. (Read the complete article)

Finney’s Altar Call and the Quest for Efficient Evangelism, by Gerardo Marti

It is therefore out of a pastoral concern for the crisis experienced by near-converts that Finney crystallized his notion of “the anxious seat.” Individuals who understand the gospel begin to occupy the anxious seat; they experience a type of physical agony that mere rest will not take away. The seat becomes a place of torture -- the unmoving agent stuck sitting amidst the stirring of their own conviction.

For Finney, the altar call delivers people from their anxiety. It takes them out of a passive state to an active one. By inviting attenders to respond to the message, the preacher delivers convicted persons from their anxiety and toward spiritual ease in the elation of obtaining salvation through their active repentance. The preacher and volunteers steer each person out of their anxiety by giving them assurance of their salvation by pointing to their standing and coming forward as a physical mark of their commitment to Jesus.

In the end, while Finney’s own conversion was private it emerged from a state of utter distress. Finney hoped to ease people from such emotional pain by directing them to a standardized response that moves them productively -- even efficiently -- toward salvation and emotional comfort.

Yes, altar calls are efficient means toward salvation, allowing more converts to find their way into Christian fellowship than if they pursued it without direction privately. But for Finney the use of altar calls emerges not for the sake of efficiency alone, but rather a pastoral concern to deliver people from spiritual agony toward spiritual elation. In this sense, finding salvation is simultaneously a means to find healing. (Read the complete article)

A Case for Altar Calls, by Regina Shands Stoltzfus

An altar call may not be the only way to issue such a call, but it may be a good way. The biblical basis for such a public testimony comes from a number of Scriptures that focus on confession: “If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,” writes Paul, “you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe...and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved” (Romans 10:9-10 NIV; see also Philippians 2:10-11). The journey to the altar expresses the call of Hebrews 4:16: “Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.”

Our words, our confessions, are therefore outward manifestations of an inward reality—that through Christ, God has called us to God’s self. We are free to accept or reject this call; coming to the altar is a signal of acceptance. It also indicates a willingness to be accountable to the believing community. (Read the complete article)

What does the Bible say about altar calls? Are altar calls biblical?

While altar calls as practiced today are not found in the Bible, their advocates cite several biblical examples as support for using them. First, Christ called each of His disciples publicly, telling them “follow Me” (Matthew 4:19, 9:9) and expecting them to respond immediately, which they did. Jesus was demanding an outward identification with Himself on the part of those who would be His disciples. Of course, the problem of Judas, who also responded publicly by leaving his life behind and following Jesus, is that the “call” Judas responded to was not synonymous with salvation.

Proponents of the altar call also cite Matthew 10:32 as proof that a new believer must acknowledge Christ “before men” in order for Him to reciprocate. Calling people to the front of an arena or church is certainly acknowledging before men that a decision has been made. The question is whether that decision is genuinely motivated by a sincere repentance and faith or whether it is an emotional response to external stimuli such as swelling music, heartfelt pleas from the pulpit, or a desire to “go along with the crowd.” (Read the complete article)

Note: jump to Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer; back to top

Against the altar call

Altar Call Evangelism, by Paul Alexander, Capitol Hill Baptist

The altar call too easily confuses the physical act of “coming forward” (walking an aisle) with the spiritual act of “coming to Christ” (repentance and belief). People are urged to come forward as if that coming forward is the critical element in being converted. But what’s required for salvation isn’t walking an aisle. It’s repentance from sin and belief in Jesus Christ (Mark 1:15). Initial repentance and belief – conversion – can happen anywhere, in the pew or in the pub.

This confusion deceives people about their spiritual state. It encourages people to think that they have responded savingly to the gospel in their hearts just because they've come forward externally and prayed a prayer at an altar. But this isn't necessarily true. It simply isn't the case that just because someone is coming forward after the sermon, they are responding to the gospel in repentance and belief. Hebrews 6 warns that there are those who have not just come forward, but who have “once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come” who, notwithstanding these seemingly convincing proofs, do not enjoy “things that accompany salvation” (Heb 6:4-5, 9; for a historical treatment, see Iain Murray's Evangelicalism Divided [Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 2000]). In other words, there is a type of true spiritual experience of the Holy Spirit, a real hearing of the word, and even an observation of the power of God, that is nevertheless not saving. Is this not also the point of the parable of the Sower (Mark 4:1-20)? External, emotional, and even temporary spiritual movement do not necessarily imply internal conversion.

This confusion often obscures the requirements of repentance and belief.
This confusion encourages people to base their assurance on a one-time event.
This confusion brings false converts with false assurance into the church’s membership.
The altar call makes conversion look like a work of man, when in fact it is a work of God.
The altar call confuses people regarding sacred space.
The altar call confuses “coming forward” with baptism.
The altar call distracts Christians from the main point of the service. (Read the complete article)

The “Altar Call” Is it helpful or harmful? by Fred G. Zaspel, published by Word of Life Baptist Church, Pottsville, PA

The emphasis on “coming forward to receive Christ” confuses the meaning of faith.

What does it mean to “come to Christ”? We all know that it is a matter of faith. Luther used terminology such as “closing with Christ,” and this terminology is exactly Biblical. We are to “look” to Him, “run to Him for refuge,” “receive Him” all these Biblical expressions speak of matters of the soul. They speak of faith. And they allow nothing else. “Come here to receive Christ” is an awful confusion of the object and nature of saving faith. Why should we confuse the issue and ask men to come “here” for Christ? Where do we find Biblical justification for such a thing? God is not concerned whether a man walks down an aisle in a church, and neither should we be concerned with it. The only concern is that they look away to Christ and to no one else. And this is precisely where we must direct their attention. (Read the complete article)

Are Altar Calls Biblical? from Trinity Baptist Church, Burlington, Ontario

While the necessity of inviting sinners to Jesus is something to be defended, that invitation must be safeguarded. In the evangelism of today, inviting sinners to Christ, which is a matter related to preaching, has been confused with giving altar calls, which is something related to methodology. When today’s preachers speak of “giving the invitation,” they invariably mean giving an altar call in which people are bidden to walk to the front of the church or auditorium as an indication that they are “accepting Christ.”

The great objective to this methodology is that it identifies a physical act with saving faith. No matter how carefully the preacher tries to explain that “coming to the front won’t save you,” the person being addressed can hardly be blamed for equating the two. All through the sermon he has been told of the importance of coming to Christ, and then at the end of the sermon he is exhorted, “Come to Jesus Christ right now; let this be the moment of decision; come as you are; He will receive you,” and at the same time he is directed to come down to the front of the auditorium. I say he can hardly be blamed for believing in his own mind that coming down to the front was indeed that very “coming to Jesus” of which the preacher had been so earnestly speaking.(Read the complete article)

Why We Don’t Use The Altar Call, by Laurence A. Justice, Victory Baptist Church

In Acts 2:36-37 we are told that at Pentecost 3,000 people were saved but no altar call was used. The saving of those 3,000 was the work of the Holy Spirit of God and not of clever emotional appeals to come to the front of the meeting place. Whatever reasons one may give for using the altar call, it is a fact that it cannot be supported from the word of God.

As we have already pointed out, some people believe and teach that if one does not give an invitation in connection with his sermon he is not evangelistic. But we cannot be more evangelistic than the New Testament and the altar call or invitation system is not to be found in the pages of the New Testament. Actually having an altar call is a departure from scriptural requirements and practice. (Read the complete article)

Closing With Christ, by Jim Elliff, Christian Communicators Worldwide

First, there is no biblical precedent or command regarding a public altar call. Whatever might be said for its use, we cannot resort to the Bible for support. Jesus nor Paul, nor any other early Christian leader used it. Did Jesus ask his listeners to come to the front after He preached the Sermon on the Mount? Did Paul say, “Every head bowed, every eye closed” as Luke quietly sang the invitation hymn on the Areopagus? Did Peter have seekers raise their hands as a sign of their interest in Christ at the end of the Pentecostal sermon?

Quickly it must be said that I espouse a verbal call to Christ in a most serious way and believe that the spoken invitation to come to Christ is a part of all gospel preaching.

The more biblical way of “closing with Christ” is to focus on the gospel itself, without props. Whereas the altar call method can be tacked on to just about anything, no matter how absent the gospel, the biblical method demands the hearing of the Word. “How will they believe without a preacher.” (Rom. 10: 14). It is the “by the will of God that they are begotten, through the Word of truth” (Jam. 1:18, emphasis mine). They are “born again…through the living and abiding Word of God” (1 Pet. 1: 23). (Read the complete article)

The Corrupt Root and Bitter Fruit of Altar Call Evangelism, by Daryl Wingerd

Most pastors and evangelists who favor this methodology would not say, of course, that a person is saved by walking forward or by raising his hand. They learned in Theology 101 that a person is saved by faith. But these meetings are filled with people who have little, if any, biblical knowledge, and often no sharp awareness whatsoever of critical doctrines. Many of them have backgrounds in false religious systems where people are supposedly saved by physical acts, such as baptism or the performance of sacraments. This “going forward” may seem to be just a different kind of sacrament that is a necessary supplement to faith—that is, unless true biblical doctrines are carefully explained and methods are not allowed to confuse the issue. In any case, according to what they are now being told, combined with what they are being asked to do, many of these theologically uninformed (or misguided) people will come to a conclusion something like this: “I agree with what the preacher has said, and I know it applies to me. Therefore, I can be saved if I will do as he says.” This is unarguably how the “opportunity to receive Christ” was presented, and unless the listener already knows more about what it means to “receive Jesus” than he has just been told, this is the way it will be perceived.

I am not at all suggesting that preachers who use the altar call in some form consciously believe that the walk forward is a saving walk. What I am asking Christians to ask themselves, however, is this: If going forward or praying a particular prayer to receive Christ are not necessary (or at least helpful) in order to acquire salvation, why do so many pastors and evangelists conclude their preaching with statements like, “I want to give you the opportunity to come forward and receive Jesus”? If the sinner can receive Jesus by faith where he sits, what additional opportunity presents itself at the front of the auditorium? (Read the complete article)

Decisional Regeneration, by James E. Adams

History tells us that whenever the gospel was preached men were invited to Christ—not to decide at the end of a sermon whether or not to perform some physical action.

The Apostle Paul, the great evangelist, never heard of an altar call, yet today some consider the altar call to be a necessary mark of an evangelical church. In fact, churches which do not practice it are often accused of having no concern for the lost. Neither Paul nor Peter ever climaxed his preaching with forcing upon his hearers the decision to walk or not to walk. It is not only with church history, then, but with Scriptural history as well that the altar call is in conflict.

One may ask, ‘How did preachers of the gospel for the previous eighteen hundred years invite men to Christ without the use of the altar call?’ They did so in much the same way as did the apostles and the other witnesses of the early Church. Their messages were filled with invitations for all men everywhere to come to Christ.

Surely it will be admitted that the first sermon of the Christian Church was not climaxed by an altar call. Peter on the Day of Pentecost concluded his sermon with these words ‘Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.’ Peter stopped. Then the divinely inspired record tells us ‘Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, 'Men and brethren, what shall we do?’ (Acts 236-37). This response was the result of the work of the Spirit of God, not of clever appeals or psychological pressure. That day the apostles witnessed the conversion of three thousand people.

C. H. Spurgeon invited men to come to Christ, not to an altar. (Read the complete article)

The Dangers of the Invitation System, by Jim Ehrhard

There is no clear biblical precedent or command related to the modern public invitation or altar call.

As noted previously, some say, “Christ always called people publicly.” It is certainly true that Christ Himself did say such things as ‘Follow Me,’ or ‘Whosoever shall confess Me before men, him will I confess before My Father which is in heaven.’
But to conclude that Jesus gave altar calls on the basis of those passages is to fail to be honest with the text. No doubt Jesus called men to Himself. But there is no example where He (or the apostles) appealed for people to “come forward” as either a testimony to their decision or as an act of accepting Him.
Jesus did NOT call people to make a “one time” decision about Him, but to follow Him all their lives. He taught that one mark of true faith is a life that continually confesses Him.(Read the complete article)

D. Martin Lloyd-Jones on the Altar Call

I feel that this pressure which is put upon people to come forward in decision ultimately is due to a lack of faith in the work and operation of the Holy Spirit. We are to preach the Word, and if we do it properly, there will be a call to a decision that comes in the message, and then we leave it to the Spirit to act upon people. And of course He does. Some may come immediately at the close of the service to see the minister. I think there should always be an indication that the minister will be glad to see anybody who wants to put questions to him or wants further help. But that is a very different thing from putting pressure upon people to come forward. I feel it is wrong to put pressure directly on the will. The order in Scripture seems to be this - the truth is presented to the mind, which moves the heart, and that in turn moves the will. (Read the complete article)

A Close Look at Invitations and Altar Calls, by Carey Hardy

In Defense of Refusing to Heed an Altar Call, by Sandy Fiedler

Altar Call, by G. I. Williamson

How to Botch an Altar Call, by Way of the Master

21 Flaws of the “Altar Call” by Pastor David Wooten

Note: jump to Against the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer; back to top

Middle ground on the altar call

Four Reasons Not to Give an Altar Call, by Dr. R. Larry Moyer, President and CEO EvanTell, Inc.

There is a place for a properly given altar call, but we must maintain a correct understanding of how, when, and where to use one. Altar calls properly handled don’t confuse the gospel, are not the basis for dishonesty and manipulation, are not viewed as the “only way,” and are not used for self-promotion. Instead, altar calls properly done say in a warm and caring way to non-Christians, “If you’d like to come to Christ, we’d love the opportunity to talk to you about that right now.” Let’s honor God by presenting the gospel clearly. Let’s also honor Him in the way we give an altar call. (Read the complete article)

Walk the Aisle, by Douglas A. Sweeney and Mark C. Rogers

While many embraced Finney's “new measures,” others were wary of the theology behind them. Finney believed that Christ's death had made salvation possible for all. Human depravity was “a voluntary attitude of the mind,” not a nature one was born with. Conversion, therefore, depended on the human will being persuaded to repent and trust Christ. According to Finney, the altar call was a very persuasive tool to move the human will. Calvinist ministers such as Asahel Nettleton rejected Finney’s confidence in human ability and his reliance on the altar call. They believed human beings were born with a sinful nature. Sinners were unable to trust in Christ until God changed their hearts. Historian Iain Murray describes many opponents of the altar call who “alleged that the call for a public 'response' confused an external act with an inward spiritual change.” Moreover, Murray says, the altar call effectively “institute[d] a condition of salvation which Christ never appointed.” Critics argued that altar-call evangelism resulted in false assurance, as a high percentage of those who went forward to “receive Christ” soon fell away.

Despite criticism, the altar call continues. It has become a permanent fixture in American evangelicalism. One need only watch a few minutes of a Billy Graham crusade on TV to recognize that what was once a “new measure” has become mainstream. (Read the complete article)

Note: jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer; back to top

For the Sinner’s Prayer

The Sinner’s Prayer, from Bible-Knowledge.com states that the sinner’s prayer is the type of prayer that you will use to lead someone who is not saved into eternal salvation by accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. On the basis of Romans 10:9, the website states if a person can verbally speak out loud without any problems or impediments, then the Sinner’s Prayer should really be said out loud. (Because of the website’s restrictions on the use of its materials, I will not post the relevant portions of its article, despite my right to do under the Fair Use doctrine.)

Against the sinner’s prayer

Romans 10:9-14: Sinner’s Prayers for Salvation? An Exegesis and Application of Romans 10:9-14 for Soulwinning Churches and Christians, by Thomas D. Ross (Master of Arts degree in Bible from Fairhaven Baptist College, a Master of Divinity degree from Great Plains Baptist Divinity School and a Master of Theology degree from Anchor Baptist Theological Seminary, Salt Lake City, Utah)

One notes that the passage does not say, “prayer is made unto salvation,” but “confession is made unto salvation.” The verb rendered “confess,” homologeo, is found 24 times in 21 New Testament verses. In at least 23 of these 24 verses, a believer’s public confession before men by is in view, not private prayer. The sole likely exception, 1 John 1:9, unlike the other passages, does in fact deal with the Christian’s prayer to God for forgiveness and restoration of fellowship. The context and the use of the Greek present to indicate continuing action, however, make it clear that no reference to a lost man saying a sinner’s prayer is found in 1 John 1:9. Thus, no homologeo passage refers to a lost man asking God to save him and consequently receiving forgiveness.

Romans 10:9-10 says nothing about the lost praying and asking God to save them. It demonstrates that one is justified by imputed righteousness upon believing in Christ, and that one who has been so justified will confess Christ before men during his life, an evidence of that new nature without which no one will enter heaven.

Even if Romans 10:13 did promise justification to all who pray to God (which it does not), it would not mean that without prayer one cannot believe in Christ and be saved. While the Bible states “except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3) and “he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16), it never says “except ye pray the sinner’s prayer, ye shall be damned.” Even the strongest possible promise of salvation to those who pray in Romans 10:13 would mean nothing for the damnation of those who do not pray. The common notion that one must pray and ask God for forgiveness or be damned is not only not taught in Romans 10:13, but it is based upon a logical converse fallacy.

Multitudes of people in the Bible were clearly converted without saying a sinner’s prayer. No example is found anywhere in Scripture of a Christian commanding or leading someone to recite one and then telling him that he was justified as a consequence of it. God’s “gospel tract,” the gospel of John, which was written specifically to show how men can have eternal life (John 20:31), employs the verb believe 100 times in 86 verses, but never commands sinners to pray and ask for forgiveness. The modern sinner’s prayer is, indeed, modern—it is not found in the Bible anywhere.

Romans 10:13-15 present, in reverse, the order in which men ultimately enter heaven. The temporal order is send-preach-hear-believe-call-heaven. Men are sent out to preach the gospel, some hear the message, believe it and are justified, and consequently are themselves transformed by it into those who call on the Lord. These enter everlasting glory when they die or at Christ’s return. Verses 16, 17 also evidence that the moment of justification is not at “call,” but at “believe.” To “obey” the gospel is to “believe” it (v. 16). Verse 17 ends the conversion order at “faith,” presenting the word preached, heard, and believed, just as v. 14 presents the order preach-hear-believe.

Classical soulwinning preachers and pamphleteers directed the lost to simply trust Christ by faith; for example, the classic 19th century evangelistic pamphlet “The Blood of Jesus,” by William Reid, which has been printed by the hundreds of thousands, directs the lost sinner to Christ and Him crucified, and does not use Romans 10:13 as a salvation verse anywhere. Horatius Bonar, in his numerous wonderful pamphlets and evangelistic discourses, did not employ a “sinner’s prayer” methodology. He stated, “Some have tried to give directions to sinners ‘how to get converted,’ multiplying words without wisdom, leading the sinner away from the cross, by setting him upon doing, not upon believing. Our business is not to give any such directions, but, as the apostles did, to preach Christ crucified, a present Saviour, and a present salvation. Then it is that sinners are converted, as the Lord Himself said, ‘I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me’ (John 12:32).” Neither Jonathan Edwards nor George Whitfield promised men that they would be saved if they would sincerely pray a sinner’s prayer.

The great Baptist preacher and lover of the souls of men, Charles Spurgeon, wrote a small book entitled Around The Wicket Gate, which was specifically designed for those who saw their need of Christ and wanted to be saved. Spurgeon states he “prepared this little book in the earnest hope that [God] may work by it to the blessed end of leading seekers to an immediate, simple trust in the Lord Jesus.” The book was for those who stand “at the entrance to the way of life.” In the book, Spurgeon always tells the lost to simply trust Christ by faith; he never tells them to pray to be saved, and he never uses Romans 10:13 as a promise of justification for those who pray. The entire book never cites the verse. (Read the complete article)

Note: For another scholarly study with a different perspective from that of the study cited above, please read “Why Confess Christ? The Use and Abuse of Romans 10:9-10” by John F. Hart, professor of Bible at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, IL. Hart holds a B.S., West Chester University; Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary; and Th.D., Grace Theological Seminary. This article was printed in a 1995 issue of the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society (a non-lordship salvation ministry). The GES article “Saving Faith In Focus” speaks against the altar call and sinner’s prayer methodology.

Closing with Christ, by Jim Elliff, Christian Communicators Worldwide

Attached to the altar call (and to personal evangelism) in this model is the use of “the sinner’s prayer.” What can be said about this? Is it found in the Bible? The sad truth is that it is not found anywhere but in the back of evangelistic booklets. Yes the Scripture says, “whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved,” but this means to evoke or place confidence in the name of Christ. The sinner may express genuine faith through a prayer, but to pray such a prayer is not the essence of the required response to the gospel invitation.

The typical “sinner’s prayer” as evangelicals have come to express it, has three elements: (1) a mere acknowledgment of sin, which is not the same as repentance, (2) a belief in the act of Christ's death, which is far removed from trust in his person and work, and, (3) an “inviting Christ into the life.” The last phrase hangs on nothing biblical (though John 1: 12 and Rev. 3: 20 are used, out of context, for its basis). It is considered, nonetheless, to be the pivotal and necessary instrument for becoming a true Christian. But God commands us to repentingly believe, not to invite Christ into the life.

Following the above, immediate assurance is given to the one who prayed on the basis of the sincerity of the person and the accuracy of the prayer. But it is the Holy Spirit who gives assurance of life in Christ, not the evangelist (Rom. 8: 16). We are to relate the basis of assurance but leave the actual assuring to the Spirit. This is rarely practiced in modern evangelicalism. We prefer rather to take the place of the Spirit in assuring the pray-er and therefore seal many in deception. It is not the efficacy of a prayer that saves; Christ alone saves. The well-quoted passage on assurance, 1 Jn. 5:13 states: “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.” “These things…written” are the tests in the rest of the letter which give a basis to determine if we are truly converted. (Read the complete article)

Note: jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer; back to top

Ten Reasons Not To Ask Jesus Into Your Heart, by Todd Friel

1. It is not in the Bible.
2. Asking Jesus into your heart is a saying that makes no sense.
3. In order to be saved, a man must repent (Acts 2:38).
4. In order to be saved, a man must trust in Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31).
5. The person who wrongly believes he is saved will have a false sense of security.
6. The person who asks Jesus into his heart will likely end up inoculated, bitter and backslidden.
7. It presents God as a beggar just hoping you will let Him into your busy life.
8. The cause of Christ is ridiculed.
9. The cause of evangelism is hindered.
10. Here is the scary one. People who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment. (Read the complete article)

Ask Jesus into your heart? by Hank Lindstrom (Calvary Community Church, Tampa, Florida)

One such term or expression is “Ask Jesus into your heart”. The same expression is sometimes phrased, “Ask Jesus into your life”, or “Invite Jesus into your heart”. Nowhere does one find anything like this in the Bible. The Bible says, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved (Acts 16:31).” Why don’t we use Bible terms? Why not drop the unclear ones?

I was raised on the phrase “Ask Jesus into your heart”and yet I was never saved. Every Sunday morning in the church that I was raised we sang a song called “Come Into My Heart, Lord Jesus”. The words were as follows: “Into my heart, into my heart; Come into my heart, Lord Jesus.” We sang this song every Sunday morning and were given the opportunity to “Invite Jesus into our hearts”. Well, I sincerely invited Jesus into my heart each Sunday and yet I was not saved.

My theology was totally based on the words of the song. I would pray something like, “Lord, please come into my heart. If you came into my heart before and left, please come into my heart again. If you never came into my heart before, please come in for the first time. If you came in and left, please come back and stay.” The song taught that Christ could come and go at will. I was confused and frustrated.

I invited Jesus into my heart at least 600 times, yet I was not saved because that message is not the gospel. I hardly missed a Sunday at church from the time I was six years old until I was eighteen years of age. To be fair, let’s say that from the time I was six years old until I was eighteen on at least 50 Sundays a year I invited Jesus into my heart. Eighteen minus six is twelve years times fifty times a year equals 600 (six hundred) times that I invited Jesus into my heart. On at least 600 occasions I invited Jesus into my heart. (Read the complete article)

Seven Reasons NOT To Ask Jesus Into Your Heart, by Dennis M. Rokser, Duluth Bible Church, Minnesota (Note: this article is written from a non-lordship salvation view)

1. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it is never found in the Bible.
2. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it is not how one is saved.
3. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it requires no understanding of the gospel of grace to do it.
4. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it confuses the means of salvation with the results of salvation.
5. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it results in either no assurance of salvation or brings false assurance to people.
6. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because Revelation 3:20 does not teach it.
7. Don’t ask Jesus into your heart because it does not clarify the terms of salvation, it confuses it – especially with children. (Read the complete article)

The Other Jesus: Justification by Faith vs. Asking Jesus into one’s Heart, by Pastor Ovid Need Jr., Linden Baptist Church, Linden, Indiana

No doubt the NUMBER ONE lie among Bible-believing people today is: “You must ask Jesus into your heart to be saved and trust him to do that (come into your heart),” etc. But look at what this is saying! “You are saved because you asked Jesus into your heart.” There is no Scriptural support for this false plan of salvation which is devastating to the cause of Christ; it places the emphasis upon a prayer that is said and what the sinner can do rather than upon what Christ has done.

An objection might be: “I don’t see any difference.” Okay, then why not change the message to something that reflects the person’s placing his trust in the finished work of Christ's substitutionary payment in the sinner’s place?

Then the objection might be, “But not everyone is able to understand that message.” If we accept this argument, we say we must reduce the gospel to the level of the natural man, removing from it the work of the Holy Spirit.

What has happened to the plain, simple and clear plan of salvation as preached by past saints of God? “...The simple act of relying upon Jesus as your Substitute and Saviour puts away your guilt and sin forever... (CHS)” It cannot be said any better.

It is not an act of praying, but it is an act of faith. There will be none in heaven because they prayed and turned their lives over to God or because they asked the Lord to save them, etc. We will be there only because of what Christ did for us and our simple faith in His work. A lost person’s growth into this faith, his “I didn’t understand back then, but I do now,” is no more possible than is evolution.

The Scripture teaches a new creation, not an evolution of the old. The enemy, a master deceiver, knows and uses our weak points. [Gen 3:1; Jn 8:44]

Revelation 3:20 and the Offer of Salvation, by Daniel B. Wallace

Everyone knows this text. It’s the verse we “close”’with when leading someone to the Lord. The picture we paint is that if someone invites Christ into their hearts, they will be saved. The only problem is that this is not what the verse is mostly likely talking about.

What, then, is this verse is affirming? First, it is not an offering of salvation. The implications of this are manifold. Among other things, to use this text as a salvation verse is a perversion of the simplicity of the gospel. Many people have allegedly “received Christ into their hearts” without understanding what that means or what the gospel means. Although this verse is picturesque, it actually muddies the waters of the truth of salvation. Reception of Christ is a consequence, not a condition, of salvation. Second, as far as the positive meaning of this verse, it may refer to Christ having supremacy in the assembly or even to an invitation (and, consequently, a reminder) to believers to share with him in the coming kingdom. Either way, it is not a verse about salvation at all, for the Laodiceans were already saved.

Does this mean that those who have come to faith in Christ via Rev 3:20 are not saved? This answer needs some nuancing. First, if they have truly put their faith in Christ, and they understand that he alone can save them from their sins, then of course they are saved. The problem is that many people cling to the symbol but never understand the reality it is intended to represent. Most likely, tens of thousands of people have “invited Christ into [their] hearts,” thinking that a mystical experience is what saves them. Then, they go on their merry way, living their lives as they did before. If you were to ask them, “How do you know that you are going to heaven?” they would respond, “Because I invited Christ into my heart.” But if you probe, there is nothing beneath the shallowness of that reply. They did what someone told them to do, but never really embraced the Savior.

Note: jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; back to top

Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer

Beyond the Sinner’s Prayer: The Power of the Gospel of a Promise-Keeping God (Acts 13:38-43), by Ptr. Russell Moore, Highview Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, on Vimeo



The “Sinner’s Prayer” – To Pray or Not To Pray? from The Evidence Bible (page 316)

The question often arises about what a Christian should do if someone is repentant. Should we lead him in what’s commonly called a “sinner’s prayer” or simply instruct him to seek after God? Perhaps the answer comes by looking to the natural realm. As long as there are no complications when a child is born, all the doctor needs to do is guide the head. The same applies spiritually. When someone is “born of God,” all we need to do is guide the head—make sure that they understand what they are doing.

Philip the evangelist did this with the Ethiopian eunuch. He asked him, “Do you understand what you read?” (Acts 8:30). In the parable of the sower, the true convert (the “good soil” hearer) is he who hears “and understands.”
This understanding comes by the Law in the hand of the Spirit (Romans 7:7). If a sinner is ready for the Savior, it is because he has been drawn by the Holy Spirit (John 6:44).

This is why we must be careful to allow the Holy Spirit to do His work and not rush in where angels fear to tread. Praying a sinner’s prayer with someone who isn’t genuinely repentant may leave you with a stillborn in your hands. Therefore, rather than lead him in a prayer of repentance, it is wise to encourage him to pray himself.

Is the “Sinner’s Prayer” Essential to Salvation? by Dr. Larry Moyer, President/CEO, EvanTell, Inc.

So what part does saying a prayer have to do with salvation? Absolutely nothing. We are not saved by saying a prayer. We are saved by trusting Christ. That’s why Christ could look at the thief on the cross and say, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise.” (Luke 23:43) Nothing is ever said of the thief “saying a prayer”. There on the cross as he hung alongside of the Savior of the world, he believed in Christ as his Savior. Hence Christ said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today, you will be with Me in paradise.” (Luke 23:43)

That does not mean saying a prayer at the moment one comes to Christ is wrong. Such a prayer has two advantages. One is that it cements in the person’s mind what he is doing (and probably did at least 30 seconds before he prayed) – trusting Christ. Secondly, having verbalized it to God, such a prayer encourages one to verbalize it to others. God does not need to be informed. He is fully aware of what the person doing – trusting Christ. But having expressed his decision to God encourages the new convert to now express it to others.

Several things are important, though. One is that in leading people to Christ, we need to make clear that saying a prayer does not save. Explain to them that it is trusting Christ that saves. Prayer is only how they tell God what they are doing. That is why if I sense the non-Christian is prepared to come to Christ I ask, “Would you like to pray right now and tell God you are trusting Christ?” If they respond positively, I then say, “Now before we pray, let me explain something. Saying a prayer does not save; it’s trusting Christ that saves. Prayer is only how you tell God what you are doing. But if right now you want to trust Christ, here is how you express that to God. Why don’t you pray aloud with me as I pray?” I then lead them in prayer, phrase by phrase as they tell God what they are doing. (Read the complete article)

What Must I Do to Be Saved? by John R. Rice

Can One Be Saved Without Prayer?

In the Bible there are many cases of sinners who prayed like the thief on the cross or the publican in the Temple. In fact, Romans 10:13 says:

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Many people believe that a sinner cannot be saved without a period of prayer, without consciously calling on God. However, the Bible does not say that a sinner must pray in order to be saved. In fact, immediately following the verse in Romans 10:13 is an explanation which shows that calling on God is an evidence of faith in the heart and that it is really faith which settles the matter. Read it again.

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?”--Romans 10:13,14.

The Lord encourages the sinner to pray, and the Lord hears and answers the sinner’s prayer if that sinner trusts in Jesus Christ for salvation when he prays. He heard the prayer of the thief on the cross, of the publican in the Temple, of blind Bartimaeus. But the Scripture says, “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?”

Certainly every one who is to be saved must believe. Prayer is evidence of faith. No matter how long one prays, if he does not trust in Christ, he can never be saved. If he trusts in Christ without conscious prayer, then he is saved already. There is just one plan of salvation and just one step a sinner must take to secure it. That step is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!

Note: Back to top; jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer

Summary of resources cited in this post

For the altar call

• Rescuing the Perishing: A Defense of Giving Invitations, by Ken Keathley, Assistant Professor of Theology, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
• Evangelistic Invitations, by Dr. Edward Watke Jr., Revival in the Home Ministries
• In Defense of the Invitation / Altar Call, by Kevin Jackson (Society of Evangelical Arminians)
• NO, NO I WON’T GO! Is it time to drop the altar call? by Keith Drury
• Finney’s Altar Call and the Quest for Efficient Evangelism, by Gerardo Marti
• A Case for Altar Calls, by Regina Shands Stoltzfus
• What does the Bible say about altar calls? Are altar calls biblical?

Against the altar call

• Altar Call Evangelism, by Paul Alexander, Capitol Hill Baptist
• The “Altar Call” Is it helpful or harmful? by Fred G. Zaspel, published by Word of Life Baptist Church, Pottsville, PA
• Are Altar Calls Biblical? from Trinity Baptist Church, Burlington, Ontario
• Why We Don’t Use The Altar Call, by Laurence A. Justice, Victory Baptist Church
• The Corrupt Root and Bitter Fruit of Altar Call Evangelism, by Daryl Wingerd
• Decisional Regeneration, by James E. Adams
• The Dangers of the Invitation System, by Jim Ehrhard
• D. Martin Lloyd-Jones on the Altar Call
• A Close Look at Invitations and Altar Calls, by Carey Hardy
• In Defense of Refusing to Heed an Altar Call, by Sandy Fiedler
• Altar Call, by G. I. Williamson
• How to Botch an Altar Call, by Way of the Master
• 21 Flaws of the “Altar Call” by Pastor David Wooten

Middle ground on the altar call

• Four Reasons Not to Give an Altar Call, by Dr. R. Larry Moyer, President and CEO EvanTell, Inc.
• Walk the Aisle, by Douglas A. Sweeney and Mark C. Rogers

For the Sinner’s Prayer

• The Sinner’s Prayer, from Bible-Knowledge.com

Against the sinner’s prayer, and reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart

• Romans 10:9-14: Sinner’s Prayers for Salvation? An Exegesis and Application of Romans 10:9-14 for Soulwinning Churches and Christians, by Thomas D. Ross
• Closing with Christ, by Jim Elliff, Christian Communicators Worldwide
• Ten Reasons Not To Ask Jesus Into Your Heart, by Todd Friel
• Ask Jesus into your heart? by Hank Lindstrom (Calvary Community Church, Tampa, Florida)
• Seven Reasons NOT To Ask Jesus Into Your Heart, by Dennis M. Rokser, Duluth Bible Church, Minnesota
• Revelation 3:20 and the Offer of Salvation, by Daniel B. Wallace

Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer

• Beyond the Sinner’s Prayer: The Power of the Gospel of a Promise-Keeping God (Acts 13:38-43), by Ptr. Russell Moore, Highview Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky
• The “Sinner’s Prayer” – To Pray or Not To Pray? from The Evidence Bible (page 316)
• Is the “Sinner’s Prayer” Essential to Salvation? by Dr. Larry Moyer, President/CEO, EvanTell, Inc.
• What Must I Do to Be Saved? by John R. Rice

Note: Back to top; jump to Against the altar call; Middle ground on the altar call; For the sinner’s prayer; Against the sinner’s prayer and Reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart; Middle ground on the sinner’s prayer

To sign or not to sign: The “Manhattan Declaration” controversy

The Manhattan Declaration released on November 20, 2009 is a document which essentially affirms (1) the sanctity of human life; (2) the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife; and (3) the rights of conscience and religious liberty. The declaration was drafted by Robert George (Professor, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University), Timothy George (Professor, Beeson Divinity School, Samford University), and Chuck Colson (Founder, the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Lansdowne, VA).

Among the declaration’s prominent signers are Rev. Jonathan Falwell (Senior Pastor, Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, VA), Albert Mohler Jr (president, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary), Ligon Duncan, Richard Land, Jimmy Draper, Bob Reccord (former president of the North American Mission Board), Daniel Akin, Gary Bauer, James Dobson, Harry Jackson, Marvin Olasky, Tony Perkins, Alan Sears, Mark Tooley, George Weigel and nine Catholic archbishops.

Anyone can sign the declaration using your name and e-mail address

Since its release three weeks ago, the declaration has been signed by more than 283,000 people from around the world. There are however questions about the signature collection process used by the declaration’s website. While the process filters out robots, it does not provide for e-mail verification (through what is called “double opt-in” procedure). This means that any mischievous or malicious person can sign the declaration using your name and e-mail address!

The crux of the controversy: how do you define “Christian”?

Alex Crain (Editor, Christianity.com) in his article “The Manhattan Declaration Controversy” has noted that “significant debate has erupted over the fact that the Manhattan Declaration has garnered the signatures of a number of leaders from Evangelical, Anglican, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions. Voices of protest have been raised as to the propriety of identifying these varying traditions all together as ‘Christians’ in the same document.”

In the FAQ section of its website, the people behind the Manhattan Declaration address this issue:

By signing the Manhattan Declaration am I somehow endorsing the theology of other faith traditions or compromising my understanding of the Gospel?

There are serious differences between the Catholic, Protestant evangelical and Orthodox traditions on many theological issues and devotional practices. However, none of those differences are alluded to in any way in the Manhattan Declaration, nor do any of the original signers believe they were compromising their respective positions by signing it. The drafting committee was careful to achieve complete harmony of all three traditions—Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant evangelical—on the critical issues addressed in the declaration, and on those issues only. This was accomplished by making sure every assertion in the declaration is rooted in the Holy Scriptures they share in common. In the final analysis, the Manhattan Declaration is simply a declaration of the signers’ common stand on life, marriage, and liberty. To read anything more into it would be contrary to the intention of the drafters and the nearly 150 leaders who signed it originally.

Some Christian leaders who are against the Manhattan Declaration and their reasons why

[1] “The Manhattan Declaration: Why didn’t you sign it, R.C.?” from Ligonier Ministries

In answer to the question, “R.C., why didn’t you sign the Manhattan Declaration?” I offer the following answer: The Manhattan Declaration confuses common grace and special grace by combining them. While I would march with the bishop of Rome and an Orthodox prelate to resist the slaughter of innocents in the womb, I could never ground that cobelligerency on the assumption that we share a common faith and a unified understanding of the gospel. (Read the complete article)

[2] The Manhattan Declaration, by John MacArthur

Here are the main reasons I am not signing the Manhattan Declaration, even though a few men whom I love and respect have already affixed their names to it:

• Although I obviously agree with the document’s opposition to same-sex marriage, abortion, and other key moral problems threatening our culture, the document falls far short of identifying the one true and ultimate remedy for all of humanity’s moral ills: the gospel. The gospel is barely mentioned in the Declaration. At one point the statement rightly acknowledges, “It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season”—and then adds an encouraging wish: “May God help us not to fail in that duty.” Yet the gospel itself is nowhere presented (much less explained) in the document or any of the accompanying literature. Indeed, that would be a practical impossibility because of the contradictory views held by the broad range of signatories regarding what the gospel teaches and what it means to be a Christian.

• This is precisely where the document fails most egregiously. It assumes from the start that all signatories are fellow Christians whose only differences have to do with the fact that they represent distinct “communities.” Points of disagreement are tacitly acknowledged but are described as “historic lines of ecclesial differences” rather than fundamental conflicts of doctrine and conviction with regard to the gospel and the question of which teachings are essential to authentic Christianity. (Read the complete article)

[3] The Manhattan Declaration, by Alistair Begg

In accord with others who have chosen not to sign, my reservation is not with the issues themselves, or in standing with others who share the same concerns, but it is in signing a declaration along with a group of leading churchmen, when I happen to believe that the teaching of some of their churches is in effect a denial of the biblical gospel. I wonder whether it might not have been more advantageous for evangelicals to unite on this matter, rather than seeking cooperation with segments from Rome, Eastern Orthodoxy and the Latter Day Saints. The necessary co-belligerence, as far as I’m concerned, can never be rooted in a Gospel other than that which has been given to us. (Read the complete article)

[4] A Review of the Manhattan Declaration, by Michael Horton

The error at this point is not marginal. It goes to the heart of the more general confusion among Christians of every denominational stripe today, on the left and the right. The law is indeed the common property of all human beings, by virtue of their creation in God’s image. As Paul says in Romans 1 and 2, unbelievers may suppress the truth in unrighteousness, but the fact that they know this revelation makes them accountable to God. However, in chapter 3, Paul explains that a different revelation of God’s righteousness has appeared from heaven: God’s justification of the ungodly through faith alone in Christ alone.

When we confuse the law and the gospel, there is inevitably a confusion of Christ and culture, and there is considerable evidence in Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and evangelical histories to demonstrate the real dangers of this confusion. In this otherwise helpful declaration, the confusion is evident once more. Alongside the theological claims that witness to the dignity of all people created in God’s image, Christianity seems to be defended as a major stake-holder in Western culture and society. By tending to confuse the gospel with the law, special revelation with general revelation, and Christianity with Western civilization, the document actually undermines its own objective—namely, to defend the dignity of human life as a universal moral imperative. Not only Christians, but non-Christians, are recipients of this general revelation. (Read the complete article)

Posted below are excerpts of the Manhattan Declaration (you can also download a PDF summary)

We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.

While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image.

We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right—and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation—to speak and act in defense of these truths. We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence. It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty. (Read the complete declaration)

Remember a missionary this Christmas

Missionary Christmas

Christmas was special when he was a child,
food and presents and carols and smiles.

Tree decorating was great family fun,
and cold nights by the fire watching old reruns.

But then one day God spoke to his heart,
and he gave up his culture to make a new start.

Now taking the Gospel to far off lands,
his Christmas is different than what he had planned.

The weather is sticky, with stench in the air,
the needs that surround him are terrible to bear.

Instead of carols and Christmas bells,
he hears chanting and the casting of spells.

The childhood dream of Christmas in the snow,
was left at the altar when he decided to go.

If only the ones who he left behind,
would remember his face during this special time.

And send him a note, or a word of thanks
or maybe even something he could put in the bank.

Then Christmas would not be so tough this year
and even for the missionary it would “good cheer.”

©Wayne Dillard 2004
www.prayercentral.net

If a husband and wife have not seen each other for more than seven years, is their marriage void?

Notes: (1) Pastors should beware of giving advice on this topic. I have been told that some pastors are advising their church members that if a husband and wife have not seen each other or have had no communication for more than seven years, then the marriage is void. This is wrong as you can read from the post below.

(2) Click the picture to download a free PDF newsletter on this topic.


It is wrong to say that if spouses have not seen or communicated with each other for more than seven years that the marriage is terminated automatically or is considered void. In situations where one spouse has not seen for a number of years or does not know what has happened to the other spouse, he or she must file a petition asking the court to declare the missing spouse as presumptively dead for purposes of remarriage.

The Family Code, specifically Articles 41 to 44, deals with the declaration of presumptive death for purposes of remarriage. There are a lot of misconceptions however about this part of the Family Code. Please let me explain.

[1] Article 40 provides that persons cannot take the law into their own hands and simply declare by themselves that their marriage is null and void. A person wanting to remarry must first obtain a court decision declaring the previous marriage null and void before getting married again.

[2] The Family Code only provides for a period of two years (extraordinary absence like in war, shipwreck, storm, etc) or four years (ordinary absence) for a person to be able to go to court and file a petition for declaration of presumptive death of the missing spouse. The seven years separation that people usually refer to was previously provided for by the New Civil Code.

[3] The court will however require the petitioner to present proof that he or she exerted earnest and diligent efforts to locate the whereabouts of the missing spouse. These efforts include asking the police or NBI for help in locating the missing spouse, using the media like newspapers or radio, etc. The court will deny the petition if the petitioner cannot present such evidence of earnest and diligent efforts to locate the missing spouse.

[4] If the court declares the missing spouse as presumptively dead, then the petitioner will be able to remarry.

[5] But the problem is if any person (friend, relative, barangay official, etc) discovers that the missing spouse is really alive, then that person can file an affidavit of reappearance with the Local Civil Registrar. If the petitioner had already gotten married, then that subsequent marriage is automatically terminated. This is provided for by Article 42 of the FC.

Posted below are the specific provisions of the Family Code on this matter:

Art. 40. The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void.

Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger of death under the circumstances set forth in the provisions of Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient.

For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under the preceding paragraph the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.

Art. 42. The subsequent marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall be automatically terminated by the recording of the affidavit of reappearance of the absent spouse, unless there is a judgment annulling the previous marriage or declaring it void ab initio.

A sworn statement of the fact and circumstances of reappearance shall be recorded in the civil registry of the residence of the parties to the subsequent marriage at the instance of any interested person, with due notice to the spouses of the subsequent marriage and without prejudice to the fact of reappearance being judicially determined in case such fact is disputed.

Art. 43. The termination of the subsequent marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall produce the following effects:

(1) The children of the subsequent marriage conceived prior to its termination shall be considered legitimate;

(2) The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership, as the case may be, shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spouse contracted said marriage in bad faith, his or her share of the net profits of the community property or conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited in favor of the common children or, if there are none, the children of the guilty spouse by a previous marriage or in default of children, the innocent spouse;

(3) Donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid, except that if the donee contracted the marriage in bad faith, such donations made to said donee are revoked by operation of law;

(4) The innocent spouse may revoke the designation of the other spouse who acted in bad faith as beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable; and

(5) The spouse who contracted the subsequent marriage in bad faith shall be disqualified to inherit from the innocent spouse by testate and intestate succession.

Art. 44. If both spouses of the subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, said marriage shall be void ab initio and all donations by reason of marriage and testamentary dispositions made by one in favor of the other are revoked by operation of law.

Free PDF newsletters on legal matters affecting the Filipino family and local Baptist churches

Issue no. 001 June 17, 2008 "Can a husband and wife in a notarized document declare that they are free to marry other persons and that they will not file charges against each other?"

Issue no. 002 June 31, 2008 "Adultery, concubinage, psychological violence and marital infidelity"

Issue no. 004 July 31, 2008 "Financial support for abandoned woman and her children"

Issue no. 005 August 15, 2008 "What surname should illegitimate children use? Problems and issues with RA 9255 and its implementing guidelines"

Issue no. 006 August 30, 2008 "The right of a divorced Filipino spouse to remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code"

Issue no. 007 September 15, 2008 "SEC registration of local Baptist churches; corporation sole and religious society or aggregate"

Issue no. 008 September 30, 2008 "Visitation rights over illegitimate children"

Issue no. 009 October 15, 2008 "Due process in the termination of employment; employee must be given five days to answer charges against him"

Issue no. 010 November 15, 2008 "Property rights of foreigners married to Filipino citizens; Can foreign citizens own lands or houses in the Philippines?

Issue no. 011 December 15, 2008 Primer on Republic Act No. 9439 Hospital Detention Law

Issue no. 012 January 15, 2009 Procedures in domestic and inter-country adoption; simulation of birth is illegal

Issue no. 013 February 15, 2009 Can a mother be deprived of custody of her child? What determines the fitness of a parent in custody batlles over children?

Issue no. 014 March 15, 2009 Miss, Ms. or Mrs? Philippine law on surnames for married women

Issue no. 015 April 30, 2009 How to compute the legitime (share in the inheritance) of illegitimate children

Issue no. 016 May 31, 2009 Philippine law on household helpers

Issue no. 017 June 30, 2009 RA 9485 Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007

Issue no. 018 July 31, 2009 Void marriages

Issue no. 019 August 31, 2009 Voidable marriages

Issue no. 020 September 30, 2009 If a woman gets pregnant by a man not her husband, will the child be legitimate or illegitimate?

Issue no. 021 October 31, 2009 Can nephews and nieces inherit from grandparents, unmarried uncles or aunts?

The Atlantic, a respected secular magazine, evaluates the Prosperity Gospel

Note: The Atlantic is an American magazine founded as The Atlantic Monthly in Boston in 1857. It was created as a literary and cultural commentary magazine. Though based in Boston, it quickly achieved a national reputation, which it held for more than a century. It was important for recognizing and publishing new writers and poets, and encouraging major careers. It published leading writers’ commentary on abolition, education, and other major issues in contemporary political affairs. The magazine’s founders were a group of prominent writers of national reputation, who included Harriet Beecher Stowe, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., John Greenleaf Whittier and James Russell Lowell. (from Wikipedia)

Excerpts from Did Christianity Cause the Crash? by Hanna Rosin from Atlantic December 2009 (note: emphasis by boldfacing supplied)

America’s mainstream religious denominations used to teach the faithful that they would be rewarded in the afterlife. But over the past generation, a different strain of Christian faith has proliferated—one that promises to make believers rich in the here and now. Known as the prosperity gospel, and claiming tens of millions of adherents, it fosters risk-taking and intense material optimism. It pumped air into the housing bubble. And one year into the worst downturn since the Depression, it’s still going strong.

Among mainstream, nondenominational megachurches, where much of American religious life takes place, “prosperity is proliferating” rapidly, says Kate Bowler, a doctoral candidate at Duke University and an expert in the gospel. Few, if any, of these churches have prosperity in their title or mission statement, but Bowler has analyzed their sermons and teachings. Of the nation’s 12 largest churches, she says, three are prosperity—Osteen’s, which dwarfs all the other megachurches; Tommy Barnett’s, in Phoenix; and T. D. Jakes’s, in Dallas. In second-tier churches—those with about 5,000 members—the prosperity gospel dominates. Overall, Bowler classifies 50 of the largest 260 churches in the U.S. as prosperity. The doctrine has become popular with Americans of every background and ethnicity; overall, Pew found that 66 percent of all Pentecostals and 43 percent of “other Christians”—a category comprising roughly half of all respondents—believe that wealth will be granted to the faithful. It’s an upbeat theology, argues Barbara Ehrenreich in her new book, Bright-Sided, that has much in common with the kind of “positive thinking” that has come to dominate America’s boardrooms and, indeed, its entire culture.

On the cover of his 4 million-copy best seller from 2004, Your Best Life Now, Joel Osteen looks like a recent college grad who just got hired by Goldman Sachs and can’t believe his good luck. His hair is full, his teeth are bright, his suit is polished but not flashy; he looks like a guy who would more likely shake your hand than cast out your demons. Osteen took over his father’s church in 1999. He had little preaching experience, although he’d managed the television ministry for years. The church grew quickly, as Osteen packaged himself to appeal to the broadest audience possible. In his books and sermons, Osteen quotes very little scripture, opting instead to tell uplifting personal anecdotes. He avoids controversy, and rarely appears on Christian TV. In a popular YouTube clip, he declines to confirm Larry King’s suggestion that only those who believe in Jesus will go to heaven.

It is not all that surprising that the prosperity gospel persists despite its obvious failure to pay off. Much of popular religion these days is characterized by a vast gap between aspirations and reality. Few of Sarah Palin’s religious compatriots were shocked by her messy family life, because they’ve grown used to the paradoxes; some of the most socially conservative evangelical churches also have extremely high rates of teenage pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and divorce. As Garay likes to say, “What you have is nothing compared to what you will have.” The unpleasant reality—an inadequate paycheck, a pregnant daughter, a recession—is invisible. It’s your ability to see beyond such things, your willing blindness to even the most hopeless-seeming circumstances, that makes you a certain kind of modern Christian, and a 21st-century American.

Read the complete article

Reaching the world for Christ through Internet evangelism and cybermissions

Updated information as of February 2009:

[A] China had 298 million Internet users by the end of 2008, more than any country in the world, and among which 270 million surf the Web via broadband access. It had a 41.9 percent growth in Internet usage compared to the previous year.

[B] Google is backing a project called 03B which aims to give three billion people from Asia, Africa and the Middle East broadband Internet access by 2010. Together with Liberty Global and HSBC, Google is investing $750 million in 16 low-earth orbit satellites that will link with ground stations such as cell towers or WiMax stations and provide high-speed networking cable connection.

[C] The number of global broadband households will near 440 million by 2010 and top 1.2 billion by 2030. With such infrastructure in place, the opportunity for broadband-enabled services - especially video - will grow dramatically.

[D] Six in ten people around the world now have cell phone subscriptions, for an estimated 4.1 billion subscriptions globally, compared with about 1 billion in 2002. Thirty nine percent of Chinese Internet users adopt cell phones to surf the Web. Students are the main strength of mobile Internet users: 43.5 percent of them use their cell phones to read online news, download music, check email and perform a variety of other tasks.

[E] As of May 2008, according to Technorati (a popular blog search engine) there are more than 112.8 million blogs.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

We live in an increasingly wired world. More than a billion people now use the Internet on a daily basis for education, home and business purposes. Consider the following statistics and facts:

[1] In a recent study, Yahoo! and consumer information group Nielsen revealed that there are now 20 million Filipino users of the Internet. The majority of Filipino Internet users range in ages from 10 to 29. For more information, please surf to my post How the Internet is impacting Filipino society.

[2] China had 298 million Internet users by the end of 2008, more than any country in the world.

[3] According to Internet World Stats, as of September 2007, Asia has 459 million Internet users out of a total population of 3.7 billion. Africa, on the other hand, with a total population of 933 million, has some 44 million Internet users.

Internet World Stats provides the following figures of Internet users in the following Asian countries: Afghanistan - 535,000; Armenia - 172,800; Azerbaijan - 829,100; Bangladesh - 450,000; Bhutan- 30,000; Brunei Darussalam - 165,600; Cambodia - 44,000; East Timor - 1,000; Georgia - 332,000; Hong Kong - 4,878,713; India - 60,000,000; Indonesia - 20,000,000; Japan - 87,540,000; Kazakhstan - 1,247,000; South Korea - 34,120,000; Kyrgyzstan - 298,100; Laos - 25,000; Macau - 201,000; Malaysia - 14,904,000; Maldives - 20,100; Mongolia - 268,300; Myanmar - 300,000; Nepal - 249,400; Pakistan - 12,000,000; Singapore - 2,421,800; Sri Lanka - 428,000; Taiwan - 14,500,000; Tajikistan - 19,500; Thailand - 8,465,800; Turkmenistan - 64,800; Uzbekistan - 1,745,000; Vietnam -17,220,812

Internet World Stats provides the following figures of Internet users in the following African countries: Algeria - 2,460,000; Angola - 172,000; Benin - 700,000; Botswana - 60,000; Burkina Faso - 80,600; Burundi - 60,000; Cameroon - 370,000; Cape Verde - 29,000; Central African Rep. - 13,000; Chad - 60,000; Comoros - 21,000; Congo - 70,000; Congo, Dem. Rep. - 180,000; Cote d'Ivoire - 300,000; Djibouti - 11,000; Egypt - 6,000,000; Equatorial Guinea - 8,000; Eritrea - 100,000; Ethiopia - 164,000; Gabon - 81,000; Gambia - 58,000; Ghana - 609,800; Guinea - 50,000; Guinea-Bissau - 37,000; Kenya - 2,770,300; Lesotho - 51,500; Liberia - 1,000; Libya - 232,000; Madagascar - 110,000; Malawi - 59,700; Mali - 70,000; Mauritania - 100,000; Mauritius - 300,000; Morocco - 6,100,000; Mozambique - 178,000; Namibia - 80,600; Niger - 40,000; Nigeria - 8,000,000; Reunion (FR) - 220,000; Rwanda - 65,000; Saint Helena (UK) - 1,000; Sao Tome & Principe - 23,000; Senegal - 650,000; Seychelles - 29,000; Sierra Leone - 10,000; Somalia - 94,000; South Africa - 5,100,000; Sudan - 3,500,000; Swaziland - 41,600 Tanzania - 384,300; Togo - 320,000; Tunisia - 1,294,900; Uganda - 750,000; Zambia - 500,000; Zimbabwe - 1,220,000.

[4] Africa Online, a company based in Nairobi, Kenya is putting up Internet cafes all across that continent.

[5] South Korea, with an Internet user population of 34 million, now has 80% of homes with broadband connection.

[6] According to Andrew Careaga, pioneer e-vangelist, it took radio 38 years to reach 50 million users. Television hit the 50 million mark in 13 years while computers reached that many users in 16 years. But the Internet reached 50 million users in just 4 years.

[7] The first batch (some 250,000 units) of the $100 XO laptop is expected to be delivered to children in developing countries in October 2007. Various governments have ordered this Linux-powered laptop which has been designed to withstand high temperatures and moisture like in Libya, Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay and Nigeria, can be recharged by foot-pump, pull-cord, or solar power, has built-in wireless Internet, and is equipped with a sunlight readable display. One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is a non-profit organization committed to providing educational opportunity, in the form of low cost laptops, to children worldwide.

[8] YouTube, the immensely popular publish your own video Internet service, reached more than ten million members in Japan in just 14 months. Of the total 70 million blogs in the world today, the largest language grouping is Japanese, with 37%. English is in second place, with Chinese third. (From Web Evangelism Bulletin, August 2007) Japan, with its highly-wired, tech-loving 127 million population has been described as one of the “major modern mission misses.” Please read "Japan and web evangelism: A missed mission opportunity."

[9] Facebook to the rescue: Please read “Coins flow in to help Indonesian Facebook Mum” by Alvin Darlanika Soedarjo of Agence France-Presse to learn how the Internet mobilized thousands of Indonesians in support of Prita, a 32-year old mother of two, who was convicted of defaming a hospital through her e-mail. The AFP story narrates how ordinary Indonesians collected a truckload of coins to help pay Prita’s fine of 204 million rupiah (about US $21,000). The coins as of the latest count weigh more than six tons.

[10] According to John Edmiston's website www.cybermissions.org, “religion seekers” are a major Internet phenomenon with 40% of Internet users regularly searching for religious information online. That is 400 million people seeking religious information.

What is cybermissions?

Cybermissions, as Edmiston defines it in his website, is the “intentional front-line use of computers and the Internet as tools for fulfilling the Great Commission, cross-cultural evangelism, discipleship, church-planting and training.” It includes websites, blogs, Flash movies, chat rooms, podcasts, Internet radio, e-mail, etc. Edmiston presents eye-opening statistics on the 43 nations where cybermissions could be the main missions strategy. His website has a Powerpoint presentation on the concept, opportunities and strategic use of cybermissions.

Videos and Powerpoint on Internet evangelism and cybermissions

In 2005, Liberty University (founded by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell) in Lynchburg, Virginia, USA hosted the “Internet Evangelism for the 21st Century” conference. The seminars by various Internet evangelism practitioners are available for viewing at http://ie-21stcentury.com/ as Google videos. The presentations can also be downloaded as an e-book (PDF format, 6 MB file size). Some of the topics tackled during the conference were: How is Evangelism Changing in the 21st Century? Communicating Christ Effectively to Secular Audiences; A Complete Internet Evangelism Strategy; Evangelistic Sites and Follow-up Systems; Internet Evangelism and the Third World; Podcasting and Internet Evangelism; New Media Technology and Trends for the Future; and Reaching the Connected Generation with Blogging.

Some of the web evangelism seminars from the Web Ministry conference held last September are now available to watch online (video and Powerpoint; best viewed in Internet Explorer). The seminar topics are:

• Evangelism and Mentoring: Building Relationships That Change Lives, by Karen Schenk, Truth Media
• The Power of Personal Testimony, by John Sorensen, Evangelism Explosion
• Reaching Your Community Through A Church Website, by Brent Purves and Cam Hall
• The Edges Of Cyberspace by John Edmiston, Antioch Internet Bible International
• Rethinking Internet Evangelism And Online Ministry by Robby Richardson, Gospel Communications, International
• Evangelism In SecondLife, by Debra Brown, Brown Governance
  
  

Understanding the nature of the Web as a communication medium (from Internet Evangelism Day)

It is vital to understand the nature of the Web as a communication medium, otherwise we can’t use it effectively:

[1] The web is not a ‘linear medium’, offering a sequential block of information or entertainment in the way that novels, videos or tracts do. It is ‘non-linear’, containing multiple blocks of material not linked together in a fixed order.

[2] Neither is the Web a ‘push medium’. Radio, TV, literature distribution or billboard advertising are largely ‘push mediums’ – that is, they send out a single indiscriminate broadcast message to anyone within range. The Web however is a ‘pull medium’. People only visit a web page if it draws them in because of something that interests them. The user is in complete control. A website therefore has no automatic audience. There is no magical ‘trickle-down’ effect whereby Christian websites will somehow be seen by non-Christians who have no wish to visit them.

[3] ‘Broadcast media’ (radio, TV, newspapers) are not really interactive, except perhaps for phone-ins or letters to the editor. The Web offers instant feedback, interaction and relationship-building. More than any other medium, it enables conversation, networking and relationships. Because the gospel flows most effectively through non-confrontational accepting relationships, two-way conversation and non-preachy open discussion, the Web fits very closely with evangelism.

[4] Do not think of the Web as ‘tracts on a screen’, or a static brochure. For many years, Christian radio suffered because it was often ‘church services on the radio’ – hymns, prayers and sermons. By trying to transfer one form of proclamation (a face-to-face Christian meeting) to the very different medium of radio, effectiveness and potential audience were reduced.

[5] It is also very important to understand the process by which people come to faith, online or offline (Gray Matrix).

If you want to know more about online evangelism, please surf over to Internet Evangelism Day for its well-written and valuable guide to web outreach. An introduction to the nature of the World Wide Web as a medium can be found in the portion entitled “Push or Pull.” The crux of the guide is “Web strategy to reach millions” while the article “Chat room, Instant Messaging, e-mail witness” discusses ways by which these technology can be used for online evangelism. You can also download a PDF handout on digital evangelism. Please read also Rusty Wright’s article “Could God use you in Internet Evangelism?”

The use of bridge strategies

Both Internet Evangelism Day and John Edmiston emphasize the use of bridge strategies, that is, identified needs around which website ministries can be created. My Family Matters website uses free legal information on the Family Code of the Philippines as its bridge strategy.

How effective are online evangelism and cybermissions?

The North American Mission Board, recognizing the impact of the Internet, appointed Siam Rogers in May 2000 as its first ever missionary to the Intenet. His website is http://www.accessjesus.org/.

Edmiston in his Powerpoint presentation cites the impact and success of the Internet ministry of Campus Crusade for Christ – Canada. He says,

TruthMedia (a ministry of Campus Crusade for Christ - Canada) evangelistic websites receive 750,000 visitors each month. It is a ministry that's dedicated to help people come to know God in a personal way through the medium of the Internet and then helping them grow in their faith through discipleship sites. Its goal is to impact people around the world by using the medium and tools of the Internet. Truth Media has 450 volunteers doing the writing, evangelism and discipleship outreach.

In an average month the website has about 750,000 people who visit the related sites, of those approximately 1,400 people will indicate that they received Christ or have made some kind of significant spiritual decision like rededicating their lives to Christ.

TruthMedia's Women Today Magazine also has a Chinese language version with the millions of Chinese women as its target audience. An Arabic version of the website, meant for women in the Middle East, is also in the works.

Edmiston clarifies that cybermissions are not meant to replace or compete with traditional missions but to work hand in hand, synergistically with each other.

Mobile phone evangelism

Six in ten people around the world now have cell phone subscriptions, for an estimated 4.1 billion subscriptions globally, compared with about 1 billion in 2002.80% of the world's population live in an area where they can use mobile phones. One billion new camera phones were shipped in 2008.

Thirty nine percent of Chinese Internet users adopt cell phones to surf the Web. Students are the main strength of mobile Internet users: 43.5 percent of them use their cell phones to read online news, download music, check email and perform a variety of other tasks.

In Japan and several other countries, more people access the Web through mobile devices than fixed personal computers, whose usage and sales are declining. In recent years the cellphone industry has seen surging growth in outskirts of China and India, helped by constantly falling phone and call prices, with cellphone vendors already eyeing inroads into Africa's countryside to keep up the growth. (From Web Evangelism Bulletin quoting from Reuters / Helsinki)

There are many innovative ways to use mobiles, as a Nonprofit Technology Network article explains. The video below shows how people from around the world are using mobile phone technology for social change.



A November 4, 2009 Reuters news story “Cheap mobile calls help more young couples elope” by Abdi Sheikh relates how mobile phones are changing Somali society.

Somali courtship was different in Hassan Aden’s day. When he was a teenager, you gave the girl’s parents 11 camels and an AK-47 assault rifle as bride price and then waited respectfully.

Now, the 55-year-old said, a mobile phone service that seems to be the only thing working in the failed Horn of Africa state is helping drive a rise in elopements, pregnancies out of marriage and a steady erosion of Somalia’s conservative values.

“The youth of today enjoy modern technology, fast transportation and free-of-charge marriages,” Aden, a store owner, told Reuters at a coffee shop in the capital Mogadishu.

“Today, even reasonable boys pay just $50 bride price and a copy of the holy Koran after making the girl pregnant or seeing her secretly for months.”

In a drought-ravaged land where rebels are trying to topple a fragile government, gun battles break out almost daily and nearly 20,000 civilians have been killed since the start of 2007, cheap mobile communications are one happy diversion.

The entrepreneurial spirit of Somalis, born out of two decades of anarchy, as well as an absence of taxes, have helped domestic mobile companies thrive despite the chaos.

Many older residents say the prevalence of handsets and such cheap tariffs -- among the lowest in the world -- is making the lives of youngsters unrecognizable. A month of local calls costs about $10. International calls can go for $0.30 a minute.

The cheap calls and extended mobile network in the Horn of Africa nation make it easier for Somalis to get in touch with willing partners and arrange quick assignations. (Read the complete article)

Some of these could have specific potential for evangelism, including the use of Bluetooth. There is huge evangelistic potential for these devices, including video clips, Short Code text response numbers, and the mobile web (from Web Evangelism Newsletter, August 2007). Portable electronic book readers such as Amazon’s ‘Kindle’ are enabling people to store a library of books to read anywhere. This creates the opportunity to distribute free Christian books, Bibles or interactive presentations.

Flash movies

These are created either in the Macromedia Flash program or in Swish Max, and can be effectively used for Internet evangelism, Bible teaching and cybermissions. We are very familiar with the printed Gospel tracts distributed during visitation or saturation drives. Through Flash, we now have the Internet versions of these tracts known as "digitracts" or "e-tracts" (see for example the very familiar Roman Road). You can view the digitracts online, e-mail them to other people, download them to your computer or embed them in your own web pages to share with visitors.

Other good examples of Flash movies used in evangelism are: [1] The Kristo by the North American Mission Board; and [2] Father's Love Letter, an eight minute preview of the 25-minute video created by Barry Adams and which has been viewed by millions of people.

E-mail evangelism with Taiwanese students

ASSIST Ministries, founded by Dan Gooding and based in Garden Grove, California, has been running various pen pal programs for 13 years with people all over the former Soviet Union and China, and now is focusing on Taiwan. The e-mail program is called “Bridge of Friendship Taiwan”.

Wooding calls the aim of this e-mail project as 'Love Tucked Inside An E-Mail message.' He explains that the idea is “to establish a friendship with people (primarily students) from Taiwan who read and speak English and, as part of that relationship, be able to share their faith with them and also learn about their life and beliefs.” Wooding adds, “This is a wonderful opportunity for American Christians from all ethnic backgrounds, to become missionaries to Asia without leaving home.”

Blog: simplified form of a website

Internet Evangelism Day also talks about the possibilities of blogs. A blog is an easy to use form of a website, capable of posting pictures and text. As of May 2008, according to Technorati (a popular blog search engine) there are more than 112.8 million blogs. If you know how to use MS Word, you can create a blog in minutes. You can use a blog for posting pictures and articles of your church events, announcements, etc. Through a blog, you can keep your sending church and supporting groups and individuals informed about what’s happening to your ministry.

My blogs are "Legal Updates" at http://www.famli.blogspot.com/ (discussion of current issues affecting the Filipino family); "Salt and Light" at http://www.-salt-and-light-.blogspot.com/ (articles on marriage, family and relationships); "Campus Connection" at http://www.campusconnection.blogspot.com/ (youth-oriented articles, including articles on photography); and "Families of Faith" at http://www.families-of-faith.blogspot.com/. I created these blogs through Blogger.com, Google's free blog-creation tool. Just type "blogger.com" at the Internet address box and you will be guided through three easy steps, and in minutes, you can have your own blog (see the YouTube video below).

How serious can blogging be? According to a Christianity Today article by Ted Olsen, Mark D. Roberts, one of the most prominent "pastor bloggers," announced that he was leaving his pulpit at Irvine, California, Presbyterian Church to become senior director at the Laity Lodge retreat in Texas and concentrate on his blogging. "My blog now becomes a part of my primary work," Roberts told his congregation.

To learn more about how to create a blog for your church or ministry, please view the YouTube video below.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _



Free websites from Google Sites

Google Sites makes it easy for anyone to create and manage simple, secure group websites. Getting started is easy, and there are a number of helpful templates. More than just a visual theme, site templates can include site structure and navigation, custom page templates, embedded gadgets, and more. Google Sites is powerful enough for a company intranet, yet simple enough for a family website.

Help the victims of Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in the Philippines

(The 2:54 mark of this YouTube video shows the damage done to UERM, a medical school very near BBC Sta. Mesa, and the dramatic rescue of a female doctor being swept away by the flood.)

You can help the victims of last week’s Typhoon Ondoy and Typhoon Pepeng (still devastating northern Philippines) through the Philippine National Red Cross.

Sermons on suffering, calamity, pain, revival and God’s gracious and merciful sovereignty (Be like the Bereans! Acts 17:11)

Habakkuk 3:2-19

O LORD, I have heard thy speech, and was afraid: O LORD, revive thy work in the midst of the years, in the midst of the years make known; in wrath remember mercy.

He stood, and measured the earth: he beheld, and drove asunder the nations; and the everlasting mountains were scattered, the perpetual hills did bow: his ways are everlasting.

I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction: and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble.

Was the LORD displeased against the rivers? was thine anger against the rivers? was thy wrath against the sea, that thou didst ride upon thine horses and thy chariots of salvation?

Thy bow was made quite naked, according to the oaths of the tribes, even thy word. Selah. Thou didst cleave the earth with rivers.

The mountains saw thee, and they trembled: the overflowing of the water passed by: the deep uttered his voice, and lifted up his hands on high.

The sun and moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the shining of thy glittering spear.

Thou didst march through the land in indignation, thou didst thresh the heathen in anger.

Thou didst walk through the sea with thine horses, through the heap of great waters.

Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls:

Yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will joy in the God of my salvation.

The LORD God is my strength, and he will make my feet like hinds’ feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places.

[1] The Arrows of the Almighty, by Lehman Strauss, Litt.D., F.R.G.S. (also available in Indonesian)

[2] Living in Light of God's Providence, by Philip G Layton, Gold Country Baptist Church

[3] When All Hell Breaks Loose, by Michael Stark, New Beginnings Baptist Church

[4] Job-Suffering and Sovereignty Part 1, by Keith Crosby

[5] Job: Pain & Faith, by Noel Sterne

[6] Sermons by David Harp

• Trust God anyway - sermon from Job
• When will God bring Revival?

[7] Evidence of Revival, Jonah 3:4-10, by Jim McCullen

[8] A Revival of the Word, 2 Chronicles 34:22-32, by Ronald E. George Jr. at the Sand Fork Baptist Church