Featured What did Jesus do? A Biblical case for using the Law in evangelism

Agreed, much more time in the Word. Some of those who didn't repent of sin will be in for a rude awakening as per Rev. 9:21. Those who told these an opposing message will not be held unaccountable for their false deceptive doctrine.

 

Do you think this comment was "respectful"?

 

Okey dokey.

Folks, I commend John (evangelist 6589) for starting this thread. Discussion about evangelism is always good. I also commend him for at least being out there trying. I daresay many on the BB never witness for Christ, but he does.

 

Agreed! If one takes offense to that, it is unfortunate. We all need more time there. We should only be offended that we do not, not that a brother told us the truth. God bless you bro evangelist6589. Keep the faith.

 

I have 'agreed' Revmitchell's post because I agree with the vast majority of it, not necessarily every word.

Trying to separate JTB, The Lord Jesus and the Apostles on the subject or repentance is not possible.

Matt. 3:2. "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!" Is it really being suggested that John the Baptist had a different message on repentance to the Lord Jesus?
Matt. 4:17. "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!" The message of Christ was exactly the same as that of JTB.
Matt. 11:20-21. 'Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes."' Is it really being suggested that the people of Tyre and Sidon didn't need to repent because they were Gentiles?

But this, it is argued, is pre-cross. Well, what about Peter on the day of Pentecost?
Acts 2:38. 'Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins......."'
And a little later:
Acts 3:19. "Repent therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out......' can sins be blotted out without repentance?

And then Paul, giving a synopsis of his ministry:
Acts 26:19ff. "therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared, first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance ......... Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing to both small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come- that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles."

Paul's message was one of repentance, but it was also the message of the prophets and Moses. To try to separate the messages of JTB, The Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles is foolish. Repentance and faith in Christ are effectively one and the same thing. Our faith is to be a repentant faith and our repentance such as causes us to trust in Christ for forgiveness. To preach from the Law of God, specifically the Ten Commandments is the obvious way to convict men of sin and bring them to repentance.

 

Thank you.

When people use those large fonts on Internet forums, it is often considered to be shouting. It can be irritating.

This is similar to the approach used by New Tribes Mission in explaining the Gospel to unreached tribes. It's great if you have the time.

However, it is certainly not the approach John used, unless you happen to point to Jesus physically and say, "Behold, the Lamb of God...." I'll stick to my guns that nobody today uses or can use John's complete message, since he was the unique forerunner.

Laugh

That's irrelevant. If you followed that logic through you would do evangelism and followup (discipleship) exactly the same. However, the message to lost people and saved people (even about the Kingdom of God) must be different. That should go without saying.

Yes, I am both. But the idea that dispensationalism "fragments Scripture" is a misunderstanding of the theology. Dispensationalism recognizes progressive revelation.

I think the best thing I can do here is point out the pattern we are given in Matthew's Great Commission. First of all, we are to "make disciples" of people. Then we are to teach them the way of Jesus. Those are two distinct messages.

Then give Scripture for this position. Remember that John's assertion is that it is the "preferred method" of evangelism. If so, then the majority of times evangelism is done in the book of Acts, the law would be taught. It is not, as I will prove in a later post.

I did not say that did I? What I am speaking of is the regulative principle.

Yes, I'm familiar with the regulative principle. No need to discuss it here.

That's passing strange. Paul said it was the Gospel, but you say it is not.

To clarify, they are not just historical facts, they are earth-shaking, convicting, challenging, mind-bending, life-changing historical facts. A person's entire life can be changed by historical facts. I have presented those historical facts to a Japanese soldier who then took a year to understand that Christ died for our sins. Finally at 9:00 one Sunday evening he showed up at my door to say, "I finally understand what you mean when you say that Christ died for our sins! A Christian friend from Sapporo visited us and spent 3 hours telling us. I believe in Jesus now!"

The historical facts that Christ died for our sins and actually rose from the dead are huge, looming over all of history. They are not simple facts. They are facts that cause repentance and faith through the Holy Spirit.

No, I did not mention them because Paul did not mention them. In fact, Paul told us exactly what he told the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 2:2--
"1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."

We don't need to go through all of the covenants and promises of the OT simply to tell someone about Jesus, though often clarifying who the Creator God is may be important. (It is important in Japan and China, where the word for "god" is very weak. And Paul did this on Mars HIll.)

About "according to the Scriptures," this is a phrase in the Greek used to refer to specific facts. For example, I might say, "According to my friend, the Cubs will win the World Series this year." Likewise, the phrase in 1 Cor. 15 is referring to certain facts, not the whole of the OT Scriptures. Those facts are the prophecies about Christ's death and resurrection.

I believe in and teach salvation history. The whole OT is a record of how God prepared for the coming of Jesus and for salvation. But I don't teach all of that to a sinner who needs Christ. They need milk, not meat.

The Romans were much more sophisticated than the Corinthians. The Corinthian believers could never have understood at that stage about the olive tree and branches. In fact, in the following centuries the Corinthian church was still notorious for their lacks. That's why we have the different epistles.

 

Here is some more truth. Ready?

You need more time in the word. And yes your post was an example of what you have been complaining of.

 

I completely agree. If you think this is what I have done you have misunderstood my points altogether.

 

The comments JOJ made did not make sense to me. I was seeking clarification as to why he introduced that comment into the discussion.

 

These events were part of salvation history. God was preparing a pure people, Israel, in order to produce the Messiah.

There was no Great Commission per se in the OT, though Ps. 96 comes close. When people sought God in the OT economy they had to do so through Judaism, because Israel's priests were the ones who had the Scriptures. God was preparing for the NT and His Son all through the OT.

Huh?? Thumbsdown

Taking the approach that we must not tell sinners that God loves them is a very similar approach to what noted Calvinist Jay Adams advocates: "As a reformed Christian, the writer believes that counselors must not tell any unsaved counselee that Christ died for him, for they cannot say that. No man knows except Christ himself who are his elect for whom he died" (Competent to Counsel, Jay Adams p. 70).

I take the position that "God is love," meaning that it is God's very nature, just as "God is holy." Therefore yes, I can tell anyone, "God loves you." A Calvinist is welcome to disagree, but then he must explain how the very nature of God is love, but He does not love some people. But that is not what this thread is about.

My "Finneyism?" What in the world is that, and how do you figure I am one? For the record, I have read all of Finney's systematic theology and thought it was atrocious.

It would take too long to tell you and derail the thread. And yes, I've read through Berkhov's sys. theo. and a bunch of other Calvinist stuff, so don't feel you need to inform me about it.

 

InTheLight

ok

Yes he did....so what? At that time the promises only went to that nation primarily.
Now the promises extend world wide...jn 12:32

All men must answer to the 10 commandments and keep them perfectly, all sin is against them. You just said all sinned...so there you go.

Here;
26 Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.

27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

30 But God raised him from the dead:

31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,

33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David.

35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

40 Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets;

41 Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.

42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.

 

I need to get to work, but before moving on I'll share a quick Bible study I did on the message of Paul in the book of Acts. If preaching the Decalogue is the "preferred way" of evangelism in Scripture, then Paul would have preached it not just once or twice, but the majority of times. So, here are the passages where Paul preached and/or witnessed. I have not included a few times where Paul's message was not specific, such as when he simply taught "the Word of God." See what you think.

Acts 9:22--that Jesus is the Christ
13:16-41--No mention of the law or Moses.
14:3--"the word of his grace"
14:14-17--God left a witness for the lost of rain and food and gladness.
16:10--"the gospel"
16:31-32--"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."
17:1-3--"Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ."
17:22-31--the sermon on the "unknown God"; all men must seek the true God and repent, because judgment is coming.
18:5--"testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ."
20:21—Paul’s message in Ephesus--"Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." And, “the kingdom of God,” v. 25.
22:1-21—to the Jews of Jerusalem in his defense: his testimony of salvation
24:10-21—Paul’s defense before Felix: mainly about the resurrection
24:25—to Felix: "And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come....
26:2-23—defense before Agrippa: His testimony, also, “22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: 23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.”
28:23—To the Jews at “Three Taverns”: "he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets."those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him."

At no time did Paul specifically use the ten commandments. When he used the law it was usually about how Christ fulfilled it and was the hope of all the prophets. So, was using the Decalogue, or even the law of Moses, Paul's "preferred method"? No, clearly not.

 

Nowhere in this lengthy post is there a word about Jesus' imminent return. Nothing about repentance.

Nowhere in this lengthy post is there a word showing Paul preached the 10 commandments to the Gentiles.

 

John of Japan

Hello JOJ

We agree much on the facts of redemptive history, as Christians we have no option.

What I would offer in response is Israel's failure to do as they Covenanted to do....This is wherethe link is found in Hebrews 12:18-24....Here is the original "Commission";
Deut.4

4 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you.

2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

3 Your eyes have seen what the Lord did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the Lord thy God hath destroyed them from among you.

4 But ye that did cleave unto the Lord your God are alive every one of you this day.

5 Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it.

6 Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.

7 For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for?

8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

9 Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons;

10 Specially the day that thou stoodest before the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the Lord said unto me, Gather me the people together,
and I will make them hear my words,
that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth,
and that they may teach their children.

11 And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

12 And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

14 And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

15 Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:

This is where the writer to Hebrews placed this incident....

So JOJ and others following this exchange...I believe that this is indeed what the scripture offers as the result of the NEW EXODUS,

The Church is God's design, prefigured by national Israel.

The law keeping and holy living by God's people results in a godly righteousness

I was speaking about the original tract with Noahs ark...I think it was by Chapel library...i will see if I could find it?

JOJ.....I believe we need to stay with the scriptural model on this and not a pragmatic one.
An examination of the NT shows that the only place the saving love of God is spoken...
is IN CHRIST.
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

When the scripture indicates clearly where the love of God is....I just stick with it....

so in the field I speak of God loving a multitude of sinners IN CHRIST.
Apart from Christ......The WRATH of God is continually abiding on them.
I am not going to remove that piece of the puzzle. It is given as part of a faithful presentation.
The love of God needs to be preached as part of God's provision for sinners who he saves.

To be apart from God is to be apart from that Love.
God is "good' to the wicked" mt 5:45....it is meant to lead them to repentance....

It is nowhere found in the book of ACTS directly....the word does not appear.
Is the love of God in the book of Acts? Yes....where is it? I N CHRIST the end of the LAW for RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Well sure...I cannot say....to a random person that God loves them, or does not love them...because in speaking of the Saving love of God...it is eternal,ie, He has set that saving love on a multitude of sinners eternally.

My message is...God is love, and yet God is Holy.
Not God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life...unless...you do not let HIM...then of course He is going to send you into unspeakable torment and flames eternally and that without mercy.

My message is that GOD LOVES SINNERS IN CHRIST...

Everyone He loves has ETERNAL LIFE
A multitude of sinners are going to be drawn by Jesus through the Spirit...Have you come to Jesus yet?

I understand what you are saying, but I have just offered an alternative...in fact I will lift this portion of our discussion and we can make another thread.

Of course you thought Finney was atrocious....he was...sincere, but misguided....I only offered that to demonstrate to you how your "comment" came across to me. It was not necessary as mine was not, but it gets the point across...."my CALVINISM" as you said..was not meant in a helpful or flattering way , was it? No...I did not think so.... You can speak freely to me about any aspect of what I post and I think you are quite capable of offering your biblical apologetic....so let's do that instead.

Berkof is one of the best...but we differ on his pedeo understanding of the covenant and ecclesiology.

 

This is a "sticking point" between the typical reformed and what I hold of the D. of G.

It is as if some of note have decided that God cannot love, and Christ blood could not be shed for all humankind. That some profound theology demanded that love and blood be limited. In doing so, they must also (imo) cling to a distortion of the Scripture truth, and attempt to wrap the distortion into how to deal with the hurting.

Never will I write 100 books and have no desire to even start. The writing of books does not the truth make, and Jay Adams is wrong. Christ wept, He warned, He is not uncaring.

I am angered that people in need are being marred by those who huddle around such distortion, and offer no real help to those in need.

Even though I hold to the D. of G. (in a modified form), I agree.

There is the general love of God that sustains earthly life and living. All benefit from such love.

Yet there is also that specific love in which the Scriptures state as "We love" as a result of His "first loving us."

What is often (imo) lost is that one can truthfully say, God's love is abounding, more so to believers who are His own children.

For Jay Adams (as others of that persuasion) to state that God does not love, such a statement is making a huge doctrinal error of the character and nature of God.

There is also the human view of love equating to tolerance and intolerance, which any real father knows is just a bad equation. Love may regulate tolerance or intolerance, but love is not synonymous with either.

 

Is it "doctrinal error" when Scripture itself says that God hates some?