Am I creating false disciples?

[evangelist6589]

I pass out lots of gospel of Johns. However in the front of each one is The Bridge tract and no question a tract advocating an easy believing message. I do so not because of that but because of the gospel of John. I have struggled with this on whether I am contributing to false converts. I know anyone whom reads the gospel led by the effectual call of the spirit will not be a false convert and I trust in Gods election but this does not grant anyone a license to preach easy believism but am I? That I wonder. But since any chat I get into with a unbeliever I always focus on the LAW and repentance.

Also when I write letters to churches sometimes I use tracts also with easy believism. I use the tract for example based on its defense of Christ or the bible, but sadly the sinners prayer is used and sin is not emphasized like it should. However my letter always has a emphasis on the 10 commandments and REPENTANCE encase my tract missed the ball. Am I also promoting easy believism?

I would say if I only gave out the tract without emphasizing a biblical message yes. But since my letters hit the ball I don't think so. There are 10 times more Arminian tracts and it's only the Calvinist ones that hit on Lordship salvation.

 

[Don]

Is this a theology question? Asking for opinions? Or does it belong in the calvin/arminius forum, since the opening post's entire foundation falls on that distinction?

Honest question, seriously.

 

[evangelist6589]

Is this a theology question? Asking for opinions? Or does it belong in the calvin/arminius forum, since the opening post's entire foundation falls on that distinction?

Honest question, seriously.

I may have labeled it wrong

 

[JonC]

I pass out lots of gospel of Johns. However in the front of each one is The Bridge tract and no question a tract advocating an easy believing message. I do so not because of that but because of the gospel of John. I have struggled with this on whether I am contributing to false converts. I know anyone whom reads the gospel led by the effectual call of the spirit will not be a false convert and I trust in Gods election but this does not grant anyone a license to preach easy believism but am I? That I wonder. But since any chat I get into with a unbeliever I always focus on the LAW and repentance.

Also when I write letters to churches sometimes I use tracts also with easy believism. I use the tract for example based on its defense of Christ or the bible, but sadly the sinners prayer is used and sin is not emphasized like it should. However my letter always has a emphasis on the 10 commandments and REPENTANCE encase my tract missed the ball. Am I also promoting easy believism?

I would say if I only gave out the tract without emphasizing a biblical message yes. But since my letters hit the ball I don't think so. There are 10 times more Arminian tracts and it's only the Calvinist ones that hit on Lordship salvation.

The only type of disciples that we can create are false ones.

 

[PreachTony]

I pass out lots of gospel of Johns. However in the front of each one is The Bridge tract and no question a tract advocating an easy believing message. I do so not because of that but because of the gospel of John. I have struggled with this on whether I am contributing to false converts. I know anyone whom reads the gospel led by the effectual call of the spirit will not be a false convert and I trust in Gods election but this does not grant anyone a license to preach easy believism but am I? That I wonder. But since any chat I get into with a unbeliever I always focus on the LAW and repentance.

I would argue that if you're struggling with handing these out, then you might want to stop and seek out God's direction in the matter. Why do you chats focus on Law and Repentance? Are we not under Grace? Was not the Law a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I'm not saying the Law shouldn't be taught. But there are deep mysteries within the law that an unbeliever will grapple and struggle with, and it may sway them away from belief. Remember that Paul stressed the milk of the Word and then the hard meat of the Word.

Also when I write letters to churches sometimes I use tracts also with easy believism. I use the tract for example based on its defense of Christ or the bible, but sadly the sinners prayer is used and sin is not emphasized like it should. However my letter always has a emphasis on the 10 commandments and REPENTANCE encase my tract missed the ball. Am I also promoting easy believism?

Again, I would move away from easy-believism. A tract that offers no explanation or an extremely weak presentation of sin and then says "to be saved just pray this prayer" is a false doctrine gospel. It will do nothing but convince an unbeliever that they are saved just because they read a prayer off the back of a card.

I would say if I only gave out the tract without emphasizing a biblical message yes. But since my letters hit the ball I don't think so. There are 10 times more Arminian tracts and it's only the Calvinist ones that hit on Lordship salvation.

Not everyone that studies scriptures believes in Lordship Salvation. Not everyone is an Arminian. Not everyone is a Calvinist. I would stray away from these matters of doctrine and focus more on the plan of salvation and the Grace God gives us. Once a person believes and has begun studying, then these doctrinal issues can come into play.

But that's just my opinion on the matter, evan.