Why do you insist that using the law is a Comfort method? Have you read the following books?
Tell the Truth
Today's evangelism
Both authors emphasize using the law in evangelism.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Critique of The Way of the Master
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
- Status
Why do you insist that using the law is a Comfort method? Have you read the following books?
Tell the Truth
Today's evangelism
Both authors emphasize using the law in evangelism.
Never heard of it named that way until now. Are you sure your link is talking about the evangelistic method and not something else? Alternatively, how do you know that, if it is talking about the evangelism method, it's not a typo on the websited?
Comfort himself insists that he is the first one for 100 years to use the Law correctly in evangelism. Read his books.
I grew up hearing it called the Roman Road, and still hear it that way in Texas.
Since the letter was sent to the church in Roman, I guess that's the Roman method.
I personally don't care for the Roman(s) Road, so it doesn't make much difference to me, but I wanted to add my testimony of that nomenclature.
He would hve us seeing that the Spirit cannot convict apart from te Law, but again, the Apostles preached not he Law, especially to the Gentiles, but Jesus death and resurrection! So Guess Paul and John and all the rest lacked that knowledge of the Law!
His teaching of the fullnesso the Holy Spirt as defined by Charasmatics is real danger, as there are NO commands given to seek that Baptism and tongues ad thus power, but all commanded to be infilled by Him!
And is there ANY passae were Paul/Peter/John et all ever said use the Law as he does?
And is there ANY passae were Paul/Peter/John et all ever said use the Law as he does?
Too bad none of the Apostles used it as he does!Comfort himself insists that he is the first one for 100 years to use the Law correctly in evangelism. Read his books.
Let's Build an Evangelistic Church (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1962)
Dr. Rice Goes to College (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1977)
What the Faith is All About (Elmer Towns, 1983)
http://jackhyles.net/soul-winning-course-annually/
http://tractleague.com/tracts/the-roman-road-single-page/
Shall I go on?
Does
Let's Build an Evangelistic Church (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1962)
Dr. Rice Goes to College (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1977)
What the Faith is All About (Elmer Towns, 1983)
http://jackhyles.net/soul-winning-course-annually/
http://tractleague.com/tracts/the-roman-road-single-page/
Shall I go on?
Maybe his Grandfaher neglected passing that on to him!
Naw, you proved your point handily. Mea culpa.Let's Build an Evangelistic Church (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1962)
Dr. Rice Goes to College (Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1977)
What the Faith is All About (Elmer Towns, 1983)
http://jackhyles.net/soul-winning-course-annually/
http://tractleague.com/tracts/the-roman-road-single-page/
Shall I go on?
Actually, John R. Rice did not use the Romans Road in his personal evangelism.
Six Hour Warning
this thread will be closed sometime after 7 pm Pacific.
this thread will be closed sometime after 7 pm Pacific.
Thanks for the warning. I may have to do a second thread to finish up, since there have been so many rabbit trails and extraneous posts.
Comfort himself insists that he is the first one for 100 years to use the Law correctly in evangelism. Read his books.
He has not read every book out there.
Thanks for joining my side of the critique!
Seriously, talk to him about it, not me. I actually pointed out on this thread the fact that James Kennedy's Evangelism Explosion uses the Law, when Comfort said it didn't.
He did not use the Law did he?
One thing that I pointed out in my thread on Hell's Best Kept Secret was that Comfort tries to discern whether or not proclaiming the Law has had an effect on the hearer. His recommendation was that if someone did not respond to the Law (something impossible for a human to tell, because "Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart."), there was no use in giving them the Gospel. Thus, in effect, Comfort advised in that book that we do not need to give the Gospel to "every creature," thus advocating disobedience to the Great Commission in Mark which commands us to do so. I found that to be very sad, and hoped that he would not advise the same thing it this book.
Unfortunately, in The Way of the Master also, Comfort once again advises against giving the Gospel to "every creature." He writes on p. 196, "Don't feel pressured to share the good news with a proud, self-righteous sinner (rebellious, cussing, arrogant) who is not willing to admit his guilt before God.... You will have to watch and listen carefully, because humility is not always obvious. If the person admits that the possibility of going to Hell does concern him, only at that point should you present the gospel."
On our last furlough from Japan, the main message I preached taught the exact opposite from Mark 16:15. Since we are to give the Gospel to everyone, we must not judge a person unworthy to hear the Gospel. Only God knows the heart. That tough-looking man with all the tattoos, that woman with the smirk, may be crying out for help deep down inside.
In contrast, Arthur Blessitt (a street preacher who has preched in every single country in the world), wrote, "Sometimes a wise guy will say, 'I've never sinned; I'm no sinner.' I just tap him on the chest and say, 'Hey, man, you're smarter than that. You know better than that.' Then I move right on to the second verse without arguing with him. Deep within, every pwerson knows that he's a sinner" (Arthur Blessitt's Street University, p. 158).
Again, "Don't let people's outside appearance intimidate you--their build, their skin color, their style of clothes, their language. Speak to their hearts. They may try to put you off with conversation, saying they're not interested in religion at all. Yet the person inside may be crying out for you to keep talking about Jesus" (ibid, p. 150).
One of the most intimidating guys I've ever known was a black belt in full contact karate and an enforcer for a drug pushing yakuza gang. Yet he trusted Christ as Savior easily. Inside he was crying out for help.
Unfortunately, in The Way of the Master also, Comfort once again advises against giving the Gospel to "every creature." He writes on p. 196, "Don't feel pressured to share the good news with a proud, self-righteous sinner (rebellious, cussing, arrogant) who is not willing to admit his guilt before God.... You will have to watch and listen carefully, because humility is not always obvious. If the person admits that the possibility of going to Hell does concern him, only at that point should you present the gospel."
On our last furlough from Japan, the main message I preached taught the exact opposite from Mark 16:15. Since we are to give the Gospel to everyone, we must not judge a person unworthy to hear the Gospel. Only God knows the heart. That tough-looking man with all the tattoos, that woman with the smirk, may be crying out for help deep down inside.
In contrast, Arthur Blessitt (a street preacher who has preched in every single country in the world), wrote, "Sometimes a wise guy will say, 'I've never sinned; I'm no sinner.' I just tap him on the chest and say, 'Hey, man, you're smarter than that. You know better than that.' Then I move right on to the second verse without arguing with him. Deep within, every pwerson knows that he's a sinner" (Arthur Blessitt's Street University, p. 158).
Again, "Don't let people's outside appearance intimidate you--their build, their skin color, their style of clothes, their language. Speak to their hearts. They may try to put you off with conversation, saying they're not interested in religion at all. Yet the person inside may be crying out for you to keep talking about Jesus" (ibid, p. 150).
One of the most intimidating guys I've ever known was a black belt in full contact karate and an enforcer for a drug pushing yakuza gang. Yet he trusted Christ as Savior easily. Inside he was crying out for help.
Attachments
Depended on the sermon, but one on one he did not use the Law.
Tell you what, friends, I think I can finish off this critique with just one more post, and this one is somewhat positive. I'm convinced that Comfort is still a Charismatic, but a moderate one. On pp. 260-262, he very gently opposes some of the excesses of the movement such as healing meetings (though he says "There is healing in the atonement" on p. 261) and the Health and Wealth Gospel.
He writes about the huge Charismatic healing and campaigns and other meetings, "Judgment Day isn't mentioned; neither is Hell; nor is there a call to repentance. I try to feel gracious toward these preachers and excuse them by thinking that perhaps these are 'teachers' within the body of Christ, whose particular gifting is to exhort and encourage rather than to save what is lost. However, the most gifted of teachers cannot be excused for not caring about the fate of the ungodly" (p. 261).
And with that I announce the end of my critique of The Way of the Master, by Ray Comfort. Thanks for tuning in.
He writes about the huge Charismatic healing and campaigns and other meetings, "Judgment Day isn't mentioned; neither is Hell; nor is there a call to repentance. I try to feel gracious toward these preachers and excuse them by thinking that perhaps these are 'teachers' within the body of Christ, whose particular gifting is to exhort and encourage rather than to save what is lost. However, the most gifted of teachers cannot be excused for not caring about the fate of the ungodly" (p. 261).
And with that I announce the end of my critique of The Way of the Master, by Ray Comfort. Thanks for tuning in.
- Status