How Did Romans 10:13 Turn Into 'The Sinners Prayer?'

[preacher4truth]

Is the intent and objective of Romans 10:13 meant to be a simplistic model of 'Say a prayer, go to heaven'?

 

[InTheLight]

Question begging.

 

[Herald]

Is the intent and objective of Romans 10:13 meant to be a simplistic model of 'Say a prayer, go to heaven'?

I do not know about Romans 10:13 as a proof-text for a sinner's prayer, but I do know that the idea of justification taking place through a prayer is unbiblical. By the time a supposed sinner's prayer has taken place the Lord has already done the work of regeneration and justification. Confessing Christ is a result of the Lord having already done His saving work.

 

[preacher4truth]

Question begging.

Obviously you don't know what question begging is. I've given no answer, I've only offered a question based upon today's usage of a passage.

That said I've offered no conclusion, only a question on said basis. Evidence supports the OP theory, as Romans 10:13 has been used to support, by way of proof text, 'the sinners prayer'.

See? :wavey:

The question remains and is based upon the conclusions of OTHERS who infer that Romans 10:13 is in fact a 'sinners prayer' and that the ones saying such are thus saved for doing so.

When did the circular reasoning assumed upon Romans 10:13 turn this passage into a sinners prayer?

So I ask again based upon the usage of Romans 10:13 within churches:

Is the intent and objective of Romans 10:13 meant to be a simplistic model of 'Say a prayer, go to heaven'?

 

[preacher4truth]

I do not know about Romans 10:13 as a proof-text for a sinner's prayer, but I do know that the idea of justification taking place through a prayer is unbiblical. By the time a supposed sinner's prayer has taken place the Lord has already done the work of regeneration and justification. Confessing Christ is a result of the Lord having already done His saving work.

Herald, you've never heard Romans 10:13 quoted or implied in conjunction with another who has prayed a prayer and that it is then a salvific prayer 'supported' by this passage? This takes place here quite often. Thus this passage is used as a proof text to 'prove' salvation 'because of' what a sinner 'has done'.

I do agree with you that the work of regeneration has already been done for the most part for those who genuinely call upon Him in this manner and that their calling upon Him is not the clincher but the evidence. I believe faith is the result of salvation not the cause.

However, I totally disagree with this passage being used as a panacea to all who say it that said are now guaranteed heaven due to being persuaded to say the prayer via manipulation. I would call this abuse of Scripture and definitely a false Gospel.

 

[Winman]

I have seen Romans 10:13 used as a proof text for the sinner's prayer many times, especially on salvation tracts.

There is support on this from scripture:

Luk 18:9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

This parable absolutely supports the sinner's prayer if properly understood.

How many men called on God here? Two men. How many were saved? Only one. Why? What is the difference?

The Pharisee was not an atheist, he absolutely believed in God, and he knew and understood the law. But he was proud and believed he could earn salvation through his own merit. This is why his prayer was not heard and he was not saved.

The publican made no boasts. He readily confessed he was a wicked sinner unworthy of meriting salvation and cast himself completely on God's mercy. His prayer was heard and he was saved.

The sinner's prayer is not some magical enchantment that guarantees salvation, but if a person sincerely confesses that they are a sinner and believes in their heart that Jesus is the Christ who died for their sins and rose from the dead, and sincerely calls on Jesus to forgive their sins and have mercy on them, they are saved.

Folks can ridicule the sinner's prayer all they want, but it was Jesus himself that showed an example of the sinner's prayer in scripture. He also showed it is not simply saying some magic words, but involves confession of sin and trust in Christ, not in our own works or merit.

 

[saturneptune]

The sinner's prayer does not exist in Scripture. This is without a doubt Arminian or non-Cal question begging, grasping at straws to justify their skip to my lou decision to be saved. The Lord saves, not repeating a prayer, doing a magical chant, or repeating a creed.

The sinner's prayer is the invention of a free willer to match their fairy tale ability to choose. So, in essence, the sinner's prayer is a crutch.

 

[Van]

Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. The question is according to the man who wills to be saved, or according to God who knows the heart. It is God alone who either credits our faith as righteousness or not. Salvation does not depend upon the man that wills. (Romans 9:16).

So by the numbers, we call on the name of the Lord after we believe.
We believe after we have heard and learned from the Father. Not all that hear learn and believe. There are obstinate and stubborn people.

 

[HankD]

The sinner's prayer does not exist in Scripture. This is without a doubt Arminian or non-Cal question begging, grasping at straws to justify their skip to my lou decision to be saved. The Lord saves, not repeating a prayer, doing a magical chant, or repeating a creed.

The sinner's prayer is the invention of a free willer to match their fairy tale ability to choose. So, in essence, the sinner's prayer is a crutch.

Romans 10

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.​

So is Romans 10:13 a false statement?

Please explain/exegete this passage.

Just curious.

HankD

 

[quantumfaith]

I think the whole "complaint" against some so called "sinners prayer" is far often simply a smoke screen put forth by some who fancy themselves more spiritually mature or enlightened. I know that many use the "terminology" of "sinners prayer", but most of the time I recognize it for what it is, a simplistic phrase for a deeper a truth. Most do not have any "intent" of it being some mystical or magical incantation, but rather an expression of a much deeper and richer truth that one has come to realize, acknowledge and confess. It one does use the phrase 'flippantly" then a real brother would seek to help one understand and grow without any form of ridicule or harshness.

 

[Winman]

I think the whole "complaint" against some so called "sinners prayer" is far often simply a smoke screen put forth by some who fancy themselves more spiritually mature or enlightened. I know that many use the "terminology" of "sinners prayer", but most of the time I recognize it for what it is, a simplistic phrase for a deeper a truth. Most do not have any "intent" of it being some mystical or magical incantation, but rather an expression of a much deeper and richer truth that one has come to realize, acknowledge and confess. It one does use the phrase 'flippantly" then a real brother would seek to help one understand and grow without any form of ridicule or harshness.

Many want to teach Lordship salvation, that you make a bargain with God to stop sinning to be saved.

Is this what Jesus showed with the parable of the Pharisee and publican? NO, the publican confessed he was a sinner and cast himself completely on the mercy of God.

Jesus said this publican went down to his house "justified". He was saved right then and there. He never had to promise to quit sinning to be saved, a promise no man has ever kept.

Luk 18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Jesus showed the difference between the Pharisee and publican, the Pharisee trusted in his own righteousness to merit salvation. The publican trusted completely in the mercy of God to save him. The publican humbled himself and came in utter dependence to God. This is saving faith.

 

[preacher4truth]

So 'call upon' means saying a prayer, and then all who say a prayer are going to Heaven?

This is what is being preached today and is how this passage is used as a proof text.

 

[Tom Butler]

My concern has been less with the use of the Sinner's Prayer than its mis-use. It is quite easy to convert the Roman Road method into a sales pitch; and the Sinner's Prayer into some magic words.

We were taught to lead one in the prayer, telling them the words to say, having them "repeat after me." After we finished, we were taught to ask the person, "did you pray the prayer? Did you ask God to save you? Did you really, really mean it?" If the answer was yes (and it always was), then were to declare them saved. And we were taught to tell them "you're now saved and don't let anyone ever try to tell you differently."

Over the years, I came to question that process. It began when I recalled my own salvation experience as a nine-year-old. I was never asked to "pray the prayer." The pastor quizzed me pretty thoroughly to check my understanding of what was going on. Do you know about sin? Do you understand that you are a sinner? Do you understand that the penalty of sin is Hell. Do you know what Hell is? Do you repent of your sins? Do you trust Jesus and Him alone to save you? Yes? Sit down right over there.

Winman makes the case that the publican's prayer in Luke 16 provides the basis for a Sinner's Prayer. I do think that God will save a repentant sinner who asks for mercy. But this is a far cry from the one-two-three, repeat after me, formula used in some soul-winning pitches. The publican, for one thing, did not need to be convinced. There was no sales pitch.

We were always taught that Romans 10:13 (whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved) equates calling on the Name with the Sinner's Prayer. If this is not a sinner's crying out to God for mercy, then what is it? Please help by exegeting his verse, along with Romans 10:9.

The problem I have is not telling a sinner to cry out for mercy, but telling him the words to say, having him repeat after you.

Bottom line, God hears repentant sinners who call on His name; He also hears sinners who simply confess their repentance and trust in the Son, and their declaration that He is Lord. The exact words are not important. This is the desire of the heart.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Herald, you've never heard Romans 10:13 quoted or implied in conjunction with another who has prayed a prayer and that it is then a salvific prayer 'supported' by this passage? This takes place here quite often. Thus this passage is used as a proof text to 'prove' salvation 'because of' what a sinner 'has done'.

I do agree with you that the work of regeneration has already been done for the most part for those who genuinely call upon Him in this manner and that their calling upon Him is not the clincher but the evidence. I believe faith is the result of salvation not the cause.

However, I totally disagree with this passage being used as a panacea to all who say it that said are now guaranteed heaven due to being persuaded to say the prayer via manipulation. I would call this abuse of Scripture and definitely a false Gospel.

Good point.....if your teaching in a bible study the "Roman Road" 10:13 is the (End of the Road). Used with....

Romans 3:23, 6:23, 5:8, 10:9..... thats how its traditionally taught my brothers. Then we are all, Happy Happy Happy..... ya go from "Being a sinner & falling short" to "Everyone who calls of the Lord will be saved. "

Its a track to run on!!! :1_grouphug: :laugh:

 

[Winman]

My concern has been less with the use of the Sinner's Prayer than its mis-use. It is quite easy to convert the Roman Road method into a sales pitch; and the Sinner's Prayer into some magic words.

We were taught to lead one in the prayer, telling them the words to say, having them "repeat after me." After we finished, we were taught to ask the person, "did you pray the prayer? Did you ask God to save you? Did you really, really mean it?" If the answer was yes (and it always was), then were to declare them saved. And we were taught to tell them "you're now saved and don't let anyone ever try to tell you differently."

Over the years, I came to question that process. It began when I recalled my own salvation experience as a nine-year-old. I was never asked to "pray the prayer." The pastor quizzed me pretty thoroughly to check my understanding of what was going on. Do you know about sin? Do you understand that you are a sinner? Do you understand that the penalty of sin is Hell. Do you know what Hell is? Do you repent of your sins? Do you trust Jesus and Him alone to save you? Yes? Sit down right over there.

Winman makes the case that the publican's prayer in Luke 16 provides the basis for a Sinner's Prayer. I do think that God will save a repentant sinner who asks for mercy. But this is a far cry from the one-two-three, repeat after me, formula used in some soul-winning pitches. The publican, for one thing, did not need to be convinced. There was no sales pitch.

We were always taught that Romans 10:13 (whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved) equates calling on the Name with the Sinner's Prayer. If this is not a sinner's crying out to God for mercy, then what is it? Please help by exegeting his verse, along with Romans 10:9.

The problem I have is not telling a sinner to cry out for mercy, but telling him the words to say, having him repeat after you.

Bottom line, God hears repentant sinners who call on His name; He also hears sinners who simply confess their repentance and trust in the Son, and their declaration that He is Lord. The exact words are not important. This is the desire of the heart.

The sinner's prayer is simply evidence of the faith that is already present in the heart. You are not going to call on Jesus and ask him to save you unless you truly believe you are a sinner, and unless you truly believe Jesus is the Son of God who died for your sins and rose from the dead. If you believe Jesus was simply a man who lived 2000 years ago who was put to death and is dead in the grave, you are not going to call on him.

So, you must truly believe the gospel to sincerely pray to Jesus and ask him to save you.

That said, you get some folks who pressure people to say a prayer they don't want to say. These persons are not saved. If you have to pressure a person into saying the sinner's prayer, most likely they do not truly believe.

In my case, I was a 10 year old boy afraid of dying and going to hell. I did not want to leave the church until I got the matter settled. No one had to pressure me into praying to Jesus and asking for forgiveness, not one bit.

 

[preacher4truth]

My concern has been less with the use of the Sinner's Prayer than its mis-use. It is quite easy to convert the Roman Road method into a sales pitch; and the Sinner's Prayer into some magic words.

We were taught to lead one in the prayer, telling them the words to say, having them "repeat after me." After we finished, we were taught to ask the person, "did you pray the prayer? Did you ask God to save you? Did you really, really mean it?" If the answer was yes (and it always was), then were to declare them saved. And we were taught to tell them "you're now saved and don't let anyone ever try to tell you differently."

Over the years, I came to question that process. It began when I recalled my own salvation experience as a nine-year-old. I was never asked to "pray the prayer." The pastor quizzed me pretty thoroughly to check my understanding of what was going on. Do you know about sin? Do you understand that you are a sinner? Do you understand that the penalty of sin is Hell. Do you know what Hell is? Do you repent of your sins? Do you trust Jesus and Him alone to save you? Yes? Sit down right over there.

Winman makes the case that the publican's prayer in Luke 16 provides the basis for a Sinner's Prayer. I do think that God will save a repentant sinner who asks for mercy. But this is a far cry from the one-two-three, repeat after me, formula used in some soul-winning pitches. The publican, for one thing, did not need to be convinced. There was no sales pitch.

We were always taught that Romans 10:13 (whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved) equates calling on the Name with the Sinner's Prayer. If this is not a sinner's crying out to God for mercy, then what is it? Please help by exegeting his verse, along with Romans 10:9.

The problem I have is not telling a sinner to cry out for mercy, but telling him the words to say, having him repeat after you.

Bottom line, God hears repentant sinners who call on His name; He also hears sinners who simply confess their repentance and trust in the Son, and their declaration that He is Lord. The exact words are not important. This is the desire of the heart.

Good response.

However, I do not believe the publicans prayer is a sinners prayer unto salvation as in the usage of the sinners prayer today, and as proof of a sinners prayer to that end.

I believe the publican merely reflects one to whom God does have mercy and this persons life is as an example of salvation at work in the life of a believer in contrast to one who believes to be one who is already righteous. IOW I don't see this as proof of 'say a prayer, go to heaven'. I see nothing in this passage to support a sinners prayer methodology as is being preached today and for the past hundred plus years.

This sinners prayer approach has gone out of control IMO and has lent itself to easy believism and to assuring many that they are, since they 'called upon the Lord' now guaranteed heaven.

Romans 10:13 is not an 'end all' verse -- there is much more in Scripture regarding evidence of salvation -- and evidence of lacking salvation. Though this is true, persons are always told to look back at an EVENT that they've participated in INSTEAD OF the Biblical EVIDENCE of Scripture, and those who use this unbiblical protocol CLAIM to be sola scriptura.

Many times in churches one is told 'with every head bowed just slip up your hand between you and me, and acknowledge you've just asked Jesus to save you, yes, I see that hand, praise God, you're going to heaven'. I see none of this in Scripture.

 

[saturneptune]

Romans 10:13 and the modern day sinner's prayer have nothing in common. Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall is saved is a far cry from doing a skip to my lou down the aisle during the invitation. Now, repeat after me "Lord, I know I am a sinner." Response, "Lord I know I am a sinner." "I believe You rose from the dead" "I believe you rose from the dead" etc, etc, etc. A parrot can do that.

That is not calling on the name of the Lord. Walking down the aisle is not calling on the name of the Lord. Repeating a prayer after a pastor is not calling on the name of the Lord. Standing up at the altar and shaking hands with the congregation is not calling on the name of the Lord.

One of the best examples in Scripture of calling on the name of the Lord is the man who says "Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner" right where he was, at the time he was there.

He did not have to wait for the end of a service after 15 verses of "Just As I Am." He did not have to be within ten feet of the podium. By the way, the First Baptist Church of Jerusalem in 35 AD is a fairy tale.

The Lord saves. Feeling guilty sermons do not save. Neither does any other man made invention.

 

[preacher4truth]

Romans 10:13 and the modern day sinner's prayer have nothing in common. Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall is saved is a far cry from doing a skip to my lou down the aisle during the invitation. Now, repeat after me "Lord, I know I am a sinner." Response, "Lord I know I am a sinner." "I believe You rose from the dead" "I believe you rose from the dead" etc, etc, etc. A parrot can do that.

That is not calling on the name of the Lord. Walking down the aisle is not calling on the name of the Lord. Repeating a prayer after a pastor is not calling on the name of the Lord. Standing up at the altar and shaking hands with the congregation is not calling on the name of the Lord.

One of the best examples in Scripture of calling on the name of the Lord is the man who says "Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner" right where he was, at the time he was there.

He did not have to wait for the end of a service after 15 verses of "Just As I Am." He did not have to be within ten feet of the podium. By the way, the First Baptist Church of Jerusalem in 35 AD is a fairy tale.

The Lord saves. Feeling guilty sermons do not save. Neither does any other man made invention.

Good words.

I recall hearing the Gospel, then knowing my guilt, repenting, believing and being saved (recognizing I was saved). The sinners prayer has never been 'the clincher'. The Gospel ALWAYS has been.

 

[John of Japan]

Questions not being asked or answered:

1. If "call upon the name of the Lord" does not mean prayer, what does it mean?

2. If "shall be saved" does not refer to eternal salvation, what kind of salvation does it refer to?

3. Prayer is a work. Salvation comes by faith. So it is not the prayer that saves you. However, would God reject a sincere prayer for salvation as a work that proves faith?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Good words.

I recall hearing the Gospel, then knowing my guilt, repenting, believing and being saved (recognizing I was saved). The sinners prayer has never been 'the clincher'. The Gospel ALWAYS has been.

Thats funny because it wasnt the gospel.... it was the realization that I had become Gods enemy. Later yes, as I began to study it, it served as a tool to help me understand & appreciate.....but to be saved by it, no. And I dont see that as necessary to salvation.