Has everyone gotten soft on sin?

[Scott J]

Originally posted by WisdomSeeker:


And when I said what I did about obeying the word of God... it was because of people who have posted on this thread...that they don't believe in soul-winning

Did I miss something? Who said they didn't believe in soul-winning?

or giving invitations. And quite frankly... I just couldn't believe it.

The "altar call" is a relatively recent development if that is what you are referring to. Many assign its popularity if not its origin to Charles Finney. Both his methods and theology were unsound.

I don't think you will find one passage of scripture establishing this as God's method for reaching the lost in church or otherwise. The church I went to that did not perform what I knew as an "invitation" usually closed with a hymn, prayer, and a simple offer of help to anyone who would come to the front after church. Anyone who needed help was taken into a private room to be dealt with.

I was genuinely shocked...that anyone would go to a church that didn't bring up what Christ did....

Did I miss something again? Who said this?

I would say that all the teaching about how a Christian should live...won't mean a hill of beans if the person isn't a Christian.

That is the point of contention. Is church primarily a place to evangelize the lost or a place of worship, training, and fellowship for believers? The example of the New Testament is the latter.

 

[SBG]

Well, like they say...we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe we are here to win the lost. We are to "earnestly contend for the faith, which was once delivered unto the saints". That "faith"
was Jesus Christ, and him crucified. The Biblical model for preaching can be found in Acts 2:22-40.
And notice vs. 42 of the same chapter; "and they continued stedfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship". What was the apostles doctrine? It was the doctrine theat was taught them by Jesus.
I believe that it was summed up very well in the "great commission". Now I agree, that there are different methods of reaching the lost, but, to ignore the fact, that we are here to reach them, and try to prioritize the church service in a way to evenly divide the preaching, i.e. some edification, some evangelism......I sincerely believe in equipping the saints, but if you don't see a growth, in the willingness of the members of the church to witness to the lost, you are failing at equipping. The secondary topics of the word, are just that, secondary. I'm afraid some churches have lost focus of the main theme. I pray yours, is not one of them.

 

[SBG]

PreachtheWord,
I publicly accused you yesterday of censoring one of my post. I found out later, that someone else had deleted part of my post. So, I wanted to pulicly apologize. It was irresposible of me to jump to that conclusion. And I am sorry.

 

[GIG]

Amen SBG, I believe that is the only reason that The LORD did not call us home immediately after saving us...to win Souls! Here is how our Church does it, or should I say Our Pastor does it, Sunday Mornings we have "Sunday School" to teach the saints, then normally there is a "Salvation" message for the AM service. Sunday night is usually geared to the Saints with hard preaching on Sin ..then Thursday night once again our Preacher usually preaches a Bible study geared to the saints....I am Not saying that anyone who posted here does this, but the people in our Church who have complained directly to me about the salvation only messages, have been SMO's (Sunday Morning Only) Christians...

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by SBG:
What was the apostles doctrine? It was the doctrine theat was taught them by Jesus.
I believe that it was summed up very well in the "great commission".

SBG you are way off base here, what was Jesus doctrine? salvation yes but was it not also discipling. What about the sermon on the mount? what about the prodigal son, the good samaritan. If you will look closely you will see that His teaching was pretty close to my statement that I felt it my calling to find salvation and edification in every text. I never mean to weaken the text by that but to strengthen it. Jesus not only taught the people the necessity of salvation but also the necessity of spiritual growth and usually at the same time.
As to your summing it up I think it is a hard thing to do to sum up Jesus He is much larger than we give Him credit for. Don't summarize Him and don't limit Him. He can save thru an edification message just as He can a salvation only message.
Murph

 

[SBG]

I agree that a person can be saved through an edification message...but if edification was the MAIN THEME, then Christ would not have had to gone to calvary. PREACH THE CROSS....IT EDIFIES!

 

[Siegfried]

Originally posted by SBG:
I agree that a person can be saved through an edification message...but if edification was the MAIN THEME, then Christ would not have had to gone to calvary. PREACH THE CROSS....IT EDIFIES!

If edification isn't the main theme, how do you explain my post above that outlines what Paul commanded Timothy to preach? Titus follows the same pattern. I think we sometimes call those the Pastoral Epistles. Could it be because they contain instruction for pastors?

You asked for the evidence. Why do you choose not to interact with it?

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by SBG:
I agree that a person can be saved through an edification message...but if edification was the MAIN THEME, then Christ would not have had to gone to calvary. PREACH THE CROSS....IT EDIFIES!

Calm down my friend, I think the problem is that it is not an either or situation but a both. I really don't know what has got you so mad that you have resorted to all caps I am hurt, just kidding. I for one have not turned from the cross and I will not, I believe the problem has been your requirement that we abandon all else and preach only the cross. Atleast that is what I thought you were saying and why I joined in.
Murph

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by SBG:
Well, like they say...we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe we are here to win the lost.... The secondary topics of the word, are just that, secondary. I'm afraid some churches have lost focus of the main theme. I pray yours, is not one of them.

Amen SBG, I believe that is the only reason that The LORD did not call us home immediately after saving us...to win Souls!

I agree that a person can be saved through an edification message...but if edification was the MAIN THEME, then Christ would not have had to gone to calvary.

I could not possibly disagree more. We are here to be conformed to the image of Christ and to glorify God (Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 1; Philippians 2:11,4:20; Revelation 1:6. The "MAIN THEME" is not, never was, and never can be the salvation of mankind. It is, was, and always will be the Glory of God.

God's use of us to spread the gospel attains primary importance in that it brings God glory. It is an important element of the Christian walk... but not an end in and of itself.

"Secondary topics of the word"? The process of santification performed by the Holy Spirit in the saints is not a secondary topic. As far as the mission of the church goes, it is the MAIN THEME and completely inseparable from the believers responsibility to joyfully declare the gospel.

Anything that does not have the glory of God as its primary focus is wood, hay, and stubble to the worker... yet God may still use these unworthy acts to save the lost. God sees and judges the intentions of our hearts.

 

[SBG]

Siegfied,
I want to say this in such a way as not to offend.
I didn't respond to your post, because, honestly I didn't see where the scripture you provided had any relevance to the discussion. I agree, that man has named that the pastoral epistles, and they are a generalization of preaching, teaching etc. But, I was wanting you to provide scripture like I used to make my point(ACTS 2) I wanted to hold you, or anyone else for that matter, to the same standard you require. I asked for scripture, that "COMMANDED" what is preached. The scripture you provided, is wonderful for a person that has been saved, but it means little, if anything to unregenerate man. Yes, I'll agree that edification, and sound doctrinal teaching is in order, but, let's not put the cart in front of the horse, so to speak. A person must be born again, for any of this to matter. To conclude, if you believe that edification is the main theme, then we have a fundamental difference of opinion. Therefore, I know that you could never change my mind on what I think is our(christians) number one priority, and I sense I would fall far short of changing yours. So to avoid argument, I chose to ignore your post...not out of disrespect, but because I feel that we have no common ground to discuss this.

People have to be saved, to be able to be edified.

 

[Siegfried]

Originally posted by SBG:
Siegfied,
I want to say this in such a way as not to offend.
I didn't respond to your post, because, honestly I didn't see where the scripture you provided had any relevance to the discussion. I agree, that man has named that the pastoral epistles, and they are a generalization of preaching, teaching etc. But, I was wanting you to provide scripture like I used to make my point(ACTS 2) I wanted to hold you, or anyone else for that matter, to the same standard you require. I asked for scripture, that "COMMANDED" what is preached. The scripture you provided, is wonderful for a person that has been saved, but it means little, if anything to unregenerate man. Yes, I'll agree that edification, and sound doctrinal teaching is in order, but, let's not put the cart in front of the horse, so to speak. A person must be born again, for any of this to matter. To conclude, if you believe that edification is the main theme, then we have a fundamental difference of opinion. Therefore, I know that you could never change my mind on what I think is our(christians) number one priority, and I sense I would fall far short of changing yours. So to avoid argument, I chose to ignore your post...not out of disrespect, but because I feel that we have no common ground to discuss this.

People have to be saved, to be able to be edified.

No offense taken, SBG. You're dealing with my point fairly, though I disagree with your conclusion. You asked me for what the Bible says a pastor is supposed to preach. In the passage I cited Paul was telling Timothy, a pastor, what to preach, so I believe it is a biblical answer to your question.

In response to Acts 2, I in no way decry preaching the Gospel to the lost, and have done it on numerous occasions in church sponsored evangelistic outreaches. I do see a couple of problems with making it a pattern for what the pastor ought to preach on a regular basis. 1. Peter wasn't a pastor, and the participants in the feast weren't a church. 2. Let's assume for a moment that Pentecost was a church. The fact that Peter preached the gospel doesn't prove that every other pastor needs to do so. Peter didn't command the other believers "Preach like I preach" like Paul did.

I'm a little fuzzy on what you mean by the "main theme." I'm assuming you're referencing the Great Commission in some sense, and I can agree with that. However, the concrete verb in the Great Commission is "make disciples." Certainly that includes evangelism, but it goes way farther than that. The evangelism I see taking place in the NT is outside the weekly Sunday church services, which seem to be reserved primarily for edification.

I'm not opposed to aggressive evangelism in the slightest, but I do believe that regular worship services are not the primary vehicle for that objective. I believe that using worship services for that purpose actually hurts the cause, because believers are led to think they've done there part if they merely drag someone into the building.

Hope that clears up some of the confusion.

 

[SBG]

Yes. It does clear things some. We probably aren't as far apart as we originally thought.
Thanks Bro.

 

[Ransom]

WisdomSeeker said:

I can't tell if you are in agreement or arguementative here... I would say that all the teaching about how a Christian should live...won't mean a hill of beans if the person isn't a Christian.

I was disagreeing. You said "if it saved one soul, it was worth it" speaking of focusing corporate worship services on the evangelization of the lost.

This is an abandonment of the biblical mandate of the church. Corporate worship is not intended for evangelism but for the building of the saints. We cannot simply ignore God's instructions to teach sound doctrine because it "won't mean a hill of beans" if unbelievers in the congregation aren't Christians first. Sound doctrine means a hill of beans to the believers there to be edified. The presence of unbelievers doesn't change the rules. That is pragmatism, and it is not biblical.

Extend an evangelistic invitation in every service if you please. There is nothing wrong with that. And when you preach to equip the saints, let them hear that truth. God's truth is not hidden under a bushel. But don't let the pagans drive the agenda of the service. Church is for sheep, not goats.

[ September 12, 2002, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

[Maverick]

That is why many SBC churchmembers are great with salvation but have no clue about anything else. Every Sunday morning is a salvation message and they do not have Sunday night services where usually on the saints come in. Then on Wednesday they have a short devotional and pray. I try to reach both saved and lost in every message, but Sunday and Wednesday are normally saint oriented.

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by Maverick:
That is why many SBC churchmembers are great with salvation but have no clue about anything else. Every Sunday morning is a salvation message and they do not have Sunday night services where usually on the saints come in. Then on Wednesday they have a short devotional and pray. I try to reach both saved and lost in every message, but Sunday and Wednesday are normally saint oriented.

I am glad you said "many" instead of all or even most, because I would have had to dissagree.
Murph