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

The way I see this sermon is Paul used the first command to show them their sin...idolatry...and how they had gods aplenty. He then focuses upon God and their need of Him, and not those idols. He was dealing with people who didn't know what to believe. They even had altar for to an unknown god.

So, imo, he did use the Law, law # 1 and then went from there.

 

Brother John, it's truly hard for me to put this in the way I want to express my thoughts, but I'll do my best...just bear with me.

Paul was evangelizing a people who had not been evangelized to. They had no knowledge of God, His Christ, or His Spirit...both of us are in agreement here. They were superstitious(per KJV), and worshipped almost anything and everything it appears. They worshipped false gods(idols) and Paul focused upon that to convict them of their sin. They probably thought it wasn't wrong to worship those idols, either. I read a saying once; "to save people, you first have to get them lost." It was when Paul focued upon their idolatry he had some accept and some reject his message.

Look, you toiled in Japan for many years, and I am thankful for you service and sacrifice to God's ministry. I pray that many were saved while you were there.

 

It was his focus on the resurrection:

v.18 "he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection"
vv.32,34 "when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter. . . .certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris"

Charles Spurgeon, "The Resurrection of the Dead":

"Reflecting, the other day, upon the sad state of the churches at the present time, I was led to look back to apostolic times, and to consider wherein the preaching of the present day differed from the preaching of the apostles. . . .the main difference I observed was in the subjects of their preaching. I was surprised when I discovered that the very staple of the preaching of the apostles was the resurrection of the dead! I found myself to have been preaching the doctrine of the grace of God, to have been upholding free election, to have been leading the people of God as well as I was enabled into the deep things of His word; but I was surprised to find that I had not been copying the apostolic fashion half as nearly as I might have done."

 

Thank you for this addition. I think this fortifies my stance.

... he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols.[vs. 16b] Paul noticed how they were serving idols and not the 'One True God'. He preached unto them the resurrection of Christ. Some even thought he was speaking of foreign gods, when in fact, it were they how worshipped foreign gods. They did not see themselves as in 'dire straits', as being 'dead in transgressions and sins.' It was then that he focused upon their idolatry and their need of Him.

 

I agree with Jerome that the main focus was the resurrection, something left out of many modern American presentations of the Gospel.

We did see some precious souls come to Christ through His grace: Ueno San the train engineer when his Christian wife died, Habazaki San who got one of our tracts, Watabe San the bar girl, the Uematsu kids and their father the Self Defense Force soldier, Usagi (not his real name) San the yakuza gangster and drug pusher (gave me a big hug the last time we met, something Japanese men do not do), U. San the drug addict who had been a yakuza enforcer, and many other precious souls. What a privilege it was to serve Christ here.

You can read the story of Usagi San here: http://www.baptistboard.com/threads/usagi-the-yakuza-gangster.76508/

 

I suggest that you cannot use the 10 commandments to convict people of sin. The Holy Spirit does that.

And again, Paul did not even mention the Decalogue. Simply because he talked about idolatry does not mean he used the Law.

 

That's messed up.

 

Please prove Scripturally that the Holy Spirit "likes to use the law" to convict of sin.

 

The Spirit convicts people of their sins. What is sin? Breaking God's Laws. Is not sinning breaking one or many of those ten?

 

I'll repeat a saying I've heard a few times..."Before you can save people, you first have to get them lost."

Apostle Paul wrote What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

As Apostle Paul also wrote So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. The Law is our sins exposed unto us. Sin is breaking one or more of God's Law. You expose people's vileness via the Law and by doing this, you show them their need of God's Christ, the only remedy for their sins.

 

You mean right here?

I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 2 Timothy 4:1-2

Contextually this is tied to 2 Timothy 3:16 and would include preaching of the Law as all of it is profitable to the man of God in his ministry of the Word. Reprove above shows this conviction in preaching and we are to use complete patience and complete doctrine.

 

I was hoping Evan would reply. The post was to him. So often on the BB he has avoided my requests for Scriptural basis for his view on evangelism.

My caveat to your answer: this is all true, but the thread is specifically about using the Decalogue in evangelism, and Evan, the OP author, says this is the "preferred method" of evangelism. That is what I am disagreeing with.

Now, if a heathen person like a citizen of Athens (to Paul) or modern Japan (to me) hears of the Decalogue, they will know nothing about it and even be confused. However, they do have the law in their hearts, namely their conscience (Rom. 2:14-15). If it is already there, and the Holy Spirit will convict them of that, why would I think it was my job to fling the Decalogue at them?

Before going to Japan I read a book that said it was a "shame society" and they did not think about sin. That was mistaken. The problem was how things are worded. The typical word for sin is tsumi, but that also means crime and they will say they have not sinned. However, if you use the term warui (bad) they immediately understand, and say that yes, they have done bad things. So, if they have the law in their hearts, why do I have to quote it to them?

 

Once again, you have avoided giving any Scripture at all for your position. You have done this over and over to me. I urge that you study evangelism in the Bible for yourself and stop depending on the WOTM guys.

I am sad to see that you feel you must slander me in this way. You could have asked, "So, John, what is your actual opinion of the 10 Commandments?" but instead you make this personal dig at me. I thought better of you.

I actually have a very high view of the Decalogue. I take the view of Jesus, who ratified all of the 10 except the Sabbath, and in each case raised the bar, for example from murder to hate in the heart. I have taught this over and over in my ministry.

 

I have heard that many times also, and it is false. We cannot "get people lost," only the Holy Spirit can do that.

Paul was a Jew, and knew the Jewish law. Gentiles are heathen, yet know the law in their hearts. The Holy Spirit convicts them based on the law they already know, though occasionally the Christian quoting the Decalogue to them can be used by God--I have never denied that, but only that this is the "preferred method" of evangelism.

Once again, we do not expose people's vileness. That is the Holy Spirit's job. We cannot convict people of sin. It's not our job. Over and over I have been amazed at the tears of convicted people, knowing I did not do that, thinking, "Where did that come from?"

In that passage (I assume you mean Gal. 3:24), Paul was combating the heresy of Judaism, not teaching how to do evangelism.

 

And you have every right to do this. FYI...I do not take offense to the 'big red X', or even the 'dumb' ranks given to me. Sometimes I have disagreed with myself and even considered myself dumb @ times. I guess others are actually agreeing with me. Laugh Roflmao Cautious