Home » Posts tagged 'conversion'

Tag Archives: conversion

The Sinner’s Prayer Absent From Evangelism in Church History

Is the sinner’s prayer a methodology for evangelism present in the overwhelming majority of church history? No.

Some time ago I read Dr. Paul Chitwood’s 2001 Ph. D. dissertation The Sinners Prayer:  A Historical and Theological Analysis (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2001). It is a valuable historical analysis of the development of the evangelistic methodology dominant in the evangelical and fundamentalist world today, namely, the practice of having the lost repeat a “sinners prayer” in order to become Christians. Dr. Chitwood argues convincingly:  “The Sinner’s prayer did not appear until well into the twentieth century. . . . Moreover, the concept of bringing or inviting “Jesus into your heart” is one that does not occur readily before the turn of the twentieth century.”

The absence of the sinner’s prayer as an evangelistic methodology is confirmed by another book I have recently been going through.  Published in 1653, it has a long 17th century title: Spirituall experiences, of sundry beleevers, Held forth by them at severall solemne meetings, and conferences to that end. With the recommendation of the sound, spiritual, and savoury worth of them, to the sober and spirituall reader, by the Welsh Baptist minister Vavasor Powel.  I am 361 pages into the book as of the time I am writing this blog post.  In those 361 pages, not one of the accounts of conversion mentions the repetition of a sinner’s prayer or having someone encourage someone else to repeat the words of a sinner’s prayer, nor of anyone being lead to ask Jesus to come into his heart and then having salvation promised upon performing such a religious ritual.  Lost sinners seeking the Lord–which certainly can include prayer (Luke 18:13)–until they lay hold on Christ by faith and are born again?  Yes, certainly.  Salvation promised to the repetition of a sinner’s prayer, or an evangelistic presentation climaxing in the repetition of such a prayer? Never. Nor is assurance of salvation ever mentioned in this book as being based on sincerely having asked Jesus into one’s heart of repeating the sinner’s prayer–for that is not how 1 John or any other book in Scripture gives assurance.

Now I have not finished the entire book yet–perhaps something will change after page 361.  But at least up to this point, it looks like this record by a Welsh Baptist preacher of what takes place in conversion does not involve the modern sinner’s prayer, and provides yet another confirmation of Dr. Chitwood’s thesis that the modern sinner’s prayer is, indeed, modern–which should not surprise us, since asking Jesus into one’s heart in order to be justified and its related complex of techniques is not found in the Bible.

I would encourage those who wish to divest themselves from the Hyles or Campus Crusade type of evangelistic methodology that climaxes with the repetition of the sinner’s prayer and a promise of salvation to those who sincerely perform this ritual evaluate better methods of explaining the gospel (I like this one, but I am biased).  Furthermore, those who do not know how urge the lost to immediately repent and believe without also telling them to immediately repeat the sinner’s prayer as the real final step should consider some of the resources on the older and more Biblical evangelistic methods here.

-TDR

Street Preaching in San Francisco by Ghirardelli Square

A few weeks ago I had the privilege of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ on the street in San Francisco, near Ghiradelli Square by Fisherman’s Wharf, where one of the cable car lines ends.  (Perhaps by the time this post goes live I will have done it again.)  I had wanted to start engaging in open-air preaching for a while.  We had prayed for wisdom about where to go, and this spot by Ghiradelli Square seemed like a good one.  I had a significant audience of people who could not really go away because they were waiting for the cable car, as well as a goodly amount of foot traffic.  Also, there are fewer crazies by Ghiradelli Square then there are on the other side of the cable car line on Market Street, so people might not instinctively assume that someone who was speaking loudly was nuts or high on drugs.  My wife was distributing gospel tracts and testimony tracts while I was preaching, and we got to have a good conversation with a man and his family afterwards.  Many people got to hear the glorious truth about God’s Son and the salvation that is in Him.

I have wanted to start preaching on the street (again) for a number of reasons.  First, we now live in a city where there are good locations to do it.  It does not make sense to preach on the street if one is in a rural or suburban area where there is no foot traffic.  In a large city there are good places where open air gospel proclamation can take place.  Second, street preaching is extremely Biblical.  The Lord Jesus Christ preached in the open air, as did His Apostles, John the Baptist, and many first-century Christians.  The Old Testament is also full of open air preaching.  Third, street preaching shows love for the lost.  People who will not take a gospel tract are confronted with orally proclaimed truth.  Fourth, street preaching is good for the Christian who does it.  It helps him to trust in the Lord and do something that the world is going to strongly dislike.  It helps him to grow in humble trust in Christ and holy boldness in His cause.  It is unpleasant to the flesh but a great blessing to the spirit.  I think it is good for “preacher boys” to preach on the street.  It is good practice.  If someone is afraid to tell the truth to total strangers who 99.9% of the time are going to have no impact on one’s life other than, perhaps, some insults or disrespect, how will he have the boldness to tell unpopular truth to a congregation of people who have the ability to remove him from his spiritual office?  Has the Lord given you a strong desire (1 Timothy 3:1) to preach His gospel?  Don’t think that you can’t preach unless you have an invitation from a pulpit.  Go out into the highways and hedges and preach to the sinners there.

I recorded the message both so that I could post it online afterwards, so more people could hear the gospel, because it could encourage God’s people, and because I think that having a recording is a wise safety precaution.  You can watch how things went here:

 


I also have the video on Rumble and on YouTube.

Nobody bothered us except for a street musician who did not like that I was there and wanted me to stop preaching. I gave him a soft answer (Proverbs 15:1) and that was the end of that.  There were numbers of people who were paying attention to the preaching, including some who were paying attention but were trying to pretend that they were not paying attention.  Sometimes I have seen people preach on the street and just ramble on.  Some others do not actually preach the gospel but just repeat a few bullet points over and over again.  Other people seem to just want to make people angry and show no compassion, while others can sound like wimps (although usually true wimps don’t preach the gospel on the street).  While someone who is not preaching anything to anyone should be careful before finding fault with ramblers, bullet-point people, crowd-whipper-uppers, and wimpy-sounders, it looks clear to me from the examples of Christ and the apostles and prophets that it is most Biblical to actually preach a coherent message, namely, the gospel.  I addressed the listeners as “friends” because we see the repeated “men and brethren” in Acts–a respectful address to those listening.  If someone is going to be offended by the gospel I am preaching, that is fine–if the Spirit pricks their hearts or cuts them to the heart, that is something good that we want.  I want to be bold and unashamed as I proclaim my King and Father’s message as His servant and son.  However, if people are offended because I am just being rude and nasty, that does not help anything.  So that is why I sought to preach the gospel in the way that I did it.

Lord willing, we will make this a regular event. I want to preach the gospel on the street at least once a month in addition to our weekly house-to-house evangelism.  Writing it like this on the blog will help me to be encouraged to keep it up.  I would like you to also to be encouraged to start following the example of Christ and His Apostles by preaching on the street, or if you are already doing it, to keep it up!

If you are an experienced street preacher and you have any thoughts on it, feel free to share them.  I have done some street preaching in the past–it was a blast to go to large conventions of the Watchtower Society in our area which that cult holds around the country and offer Christ to thousands of members of that false religion–but it has been a while (if they have conventions in your area, and you can find a “free speech zone” or other place near where they are meeting where you can preach without getting kicked out, I would encourage you to do that).  I am much more interested in hearing comments from people who are members of Biblical Baptist churches than I am in hearing from people who are part of strange false religions that go street preaching.  One thing I already know I want to to do is get a sign with church information and a website.  There were people who were listening to the preaching but did not come by and take a tract, and I want them to know how to find out more when they are not in a situation where, because of peer pressure or for other reasons, they are not willing to come up and take gospel literature with contact information from one of the Lord’s churches.  I am thankful for those who pray for us and pray for the gospel to get out in the very needy San Francisco Bay Area.  Thank you!

TDR

You Can Lead an Evangelistic Bible Study!

You can lead an evangelistic Bible study! I have mentioned on What is Truth? before the series of evangelistic Bible studies that the FaithSaves.net website has made available.  The seven studies themselves can be viewed here, where one can also see an example by video of how one can present them to the lost.  The files can also be downloaded and customized with updated church addresses here.  They are in use in various churches in the United States and in foreign countries.

If you have never led an evangelistic Bible study before, I have had the privilege of teaching an extensive series on how to lead one which you can watch.  We have gone through study #1, on the nature of Scripture, study #2, on the one true Triune God, study #3, on God’s law and man’s sin, and study #4, on the Person of the Mediator, Jesus Christ, and His death, burial, and resurrection.  Study #5, covering repentance and faith, has been started.  So now you can not only see a video example of how to lead an evangelistic Bible study, have extensive written notes that can help you to do it, but also have extensive video teaching on how to do it.

Thus, if you are not trying to preach the gospel to the lost and to follow the pattern in Acts of regularly giving more and more truth to interested people until they either repent and believe or are hardened and do not want the truth anymore, what is your excuse?  Is it one that will stand up at the judgment seat of the holy Christ who died for the sins of the world?  Can Christ die for every person, but you do nothing or nearly nothing to preach the gospel to them, both through clearly explaining the entire gospel in single interactions and through evangelistic explanation in repeated, regular sessions–an evangelistic Bible study?

Of course, there are many ways to explain to the lost the glorious riches of God’s grace.  If your church has a different evangelistic Bible study that they like better, that still presents the full-orbed truth, that is just fine.  But you need to be doing something.  Christ did not save you so that you could be in the pew-warming ministry, but so that you can be in the ministry of making disciples from every kindred, tongue, and nation (Matthew 28:18-20).

TDR

Sanctification: Bible, Keswick, Wesleyan, Pentecostal Views

Confusion on the nature of progressive sanctification is widespread today.  What are the basic differences between the views on sanctification taught in the Bible and the views of sanctification promoted by the Wesleyan (Methodist, Holiness), Keswick (Higher Life), Pentecostal (Assemblies of God), and what I call the Weak on Repentance (“free grace,” anti-Lordship) movements?

As part of the series on how to lead an evangelistic Bible study (the studies themselves are here), I provide an overview of these five different positions (one true, four false) in the video below, which can also be watched and commented on YouTube here.

TDR

Revivalism or Fake Revival, Jesus Revolution, and Asbury

Other Work By Me On This Topic (Here1, Here2, Here3, Here4, Here5, Here6, Here7, Here8, Here9, Here10, and Here11)

What do you think is worse?  Fake Revival or No Revival?  I would say, fake is worse.  I’ve got, I think, good reasons for fake being worse than no revival.  Fake revival does far more damage than nothing happening.  True revivals through history occurred.  Probably more fake ones though.

Jesus Revolution and Asbury University

In recent days, attention focuses in the United States among religious folk especially about an apparent revival in the 1960s, called the Jesus Revolution in Time Magazine.  Descendants of Calvary Chapel made a movie, which is in mainstream, secular theaters.  Another apparent revival presented itself in Asbury, Kentucky, at Asbury University, a historic Wesleyan/Holiness institution.  I see it as a great interest that these two so-called revivals dovetailed like they did.

Revival moved up as a conversation topic.  Conservative podcasts even among non-believers discuss the two, Jesus Revolution and Asbury.  I think Fox News mentioned the two in various instances.  Because Emmy award winner, Kelsey Grammer, starred as Chuck Smith in the Jesus Revolution movie, that brought greater coverage and consciousness.

Asbury reads as Woke or somewhat woke, which modified its revival in the traditional sense.  In the history of the United States, historians point to two revivals they call “the First Great Awakening” and “the Second Great Awakening.”  Before the second, the first was just the Great Awakening, like the first was just the Great War until a second World War occurred.

The two, the first and second Great Awakenings, were much different in nature and in effect.  A big chunk of professing Christendom rejects the second Great Awakening and says only the Great Awakening in colonial America actually happened.  I would be one of those.  I agree the Great Awakening was a revival.  The second was a fake one.

Controversy of Calling Something “Not a Revival”

Calling a professed revival, not a revival, is as controversial as denying the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election.  People who accept the revival, like those who say the Covid vaccinations were wonderful, want to hear only positive affirmation of their revival.

Questioning a revival is very close to questioning salvation, which is taught in scripture.  If you read either 1 John or James, those two epistles among other places in the Bible, you see challenging or questioning a salvation profession.  John does it.  James does it.  Paul does it.  And Jesus does it.  Some will stand at the very Great White Throne before Jesus, professing salvation, and He will say, “Depart from me, I never knew you.”

Revival, as I see it in scripture, is a larger than normal flurry of true conversions.  The idea of revival indicates something dead becoming alive, which speaks of regeneration.  People are getting really saved in large numbers and based upon true gospel preaching.

The Asbury leaders say that God brought a revival there starting on February 8.  They also say they can’t stop it, since God brought it, even though they did stop the regular meetings there just this last week in part because of a case of measles.  As you might comprehend already, I don’t think the Asbury “Outpouring” or the Jesus Revolution were revival.  I don’t need to wait to see on those two.  I’m saying right now.  They’re not.

My Experience

School Camp

As a senior in high school, I experienced my only gully-washer so-called revival experience.  My academy had school camp, which it also called “spiritual emphasis week.”  We got revivalistic style preaching morning and night.  In long and emotional invitations, weeping students knelt at the front.  Thirteen made professions.

The week ended with a session of emotional testimonies.  Then we headed home.  It did not translate into anything lasting.  Not long after, it was the same-old, same-old with rebellion, apathy, and lack of biblical interest.  The effects of school camp and spiritual emphasis week, despite the “revival,” didn’t continue.

Jack Hyles

When Jack Hyles was alive and in his heyday, in many instances I was in meetings where almost everyone in massive auditoriums came forward at his invitation.  They streamed forward with only a few people left in their seats.  I would think that Hyles could easily vie with any revivalist in his production of effect.  If immediate outward manifestations measured revival, Hyles did better than anyone I’ve ever seen and on a more consistent basis.

At one point, independent Baptist, revivalist churches in the Hyles movement were the largest churches in the world.  Huge crowds gathered to hear a line-up of revivalist preachers.  They were pragmatic and doctrinally errant, but people felt intense closeness to God. I’m telling you that I’ve seen it.

Jack Hyles compared his gatherings to the Day of Pentecost and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.  This recent “revival” at Asbury University its advocates also call an “outpouring.”  This reflects a particular viewpoint about the Holy Spirit, that since the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, more outpourings of Him might occur.

Mexico

I took a trip to Mexico after my Freshman year in high school, and we drove into remote mountain villages around Monterrey to hold revival meetings.  I didn’t know Spanish except for six or so verses I could quote then.  Dozens and dozens made professions of faith with the pragmatic, emotional manipulation that occurred by my group.  I would contend that much greater fake revival occurred in the 60s and 70s through revivalists than the Asbury one.  These revivals did not get popular media attention of Asbury or the Jesus Revolution, but they resulted in explosive numerical growth as significant as the Jesus Revolution and much greater than Asbury.

Revival?

In listening to a few evaluations of the Jesus Revolution, a significant effect of this revival, mentioned by supporters, was the rise and popularity of Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) and informal or casual dress in church attenders.  I could add others from reading and observation. I’ve read Calvary Chapel Distinctives and the Philosophy of Calvary Chapel.  I got especially interested, because of one of the largest evangelical churches in the state of Oregon is in Applegate, very close to where we started our church in Jackson County there.  Many people involved with the movement, it’s obvious have no true conversion and don’t even understand the gospel.

I listened to at least one of the revivalists running the Asbury revival in one of its earlier video recorded services.  I would not characterize what I saw as revival.  I wouldn’t call it gospel preaching.  It was so shallow, superficial, sentimental, worldly, woke, and Charismatic that I would have nothing to do with it.  I hope someone gets saved through it, like Paul hoped in Philippians 1 with men who opposed him.  Of course, I would want the salvation of people in Kentucky in the Asbury vein and through the Jesus Movement out of California.  I believe both hurt the overall cause of Christ like any fake revival would.

Many years ago, Ian Murray wrote the classic Revival and Revivalism, distinguishing between true revival and only revivalism.  Almost everything today is revivalism, which is fake revival.  People want God to do something.  God is doing something.  Instead of being so overtly concerned that He does something, they should surrender to what He has done, is doing, and will do in the future.

More to Come

500,000+ Page Views for Faithsaves.net!

I am thankful that the Faithsaves.net website recently passed 500,000 page views. I suspect that is a larger number than the number of people who live in many of the towns and cities that blog readers here live in.  I am thankful that the website continues to impact people with God’s glorious truth.  Lord willing, I look forward to 1 million views as the next significant milestone.

 

As discussed on the page here, one can get bumper stickers, car magnets, T-shirts, and shirts with collars promoting the gospel and faithsaves.net. We have appreciated the opportunity for our vehicle to be an instrument that gives people the opportunity to spread the truth.  Many businesses have information all over their company vehicles; why should not those who are about their Father’s business do the same?  (Of course, if your church already has decals or other information they recommend, by all means consider them.)  (If you buy something on the link above–or practically anywhere else on the Internet–you can save by doing what this article says–click through a portal first, or, for Amazon, do this first.)

TDR

Charles Spurgeon: My Conversion Testimony

Have you ever read the conversion testimony of the famous Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon?

Charles Spurgeon conversion testimony

It is a blessing to read.  Here it is:

 

I sometimes think I might have been in darkness and despair until now had it not been for the goodness of God in sending a snowstorm, one Sunday morning, while I was going to a certain place of worship. When I could go no further, I turned down a side street, and came to a little Primitive Methodist Chapel. In that chapel there may have been a dozen or fifteen people. I had heard of the Primitive Methodists, how they sang so loudly that they made people’s heads ache; but that did not matter to me. I wanted to know how I might be saved, and if they could tell me that, I did not care how much they made my head ache. The minister did not come that morning; he was snowed up, I suppose. At last, a very thin-looking man, a shoemaker, of tailor, or something of that sort, went up into the pulpit to preach. Now, it is well that preachers should be instructed; but this man was really stupid. He was obliged to stick to his text, for the simple reason that he had little else to say. The text was,—

“Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth” [Isaiah 45:22]

He did not even pronounce the words rightly, but that did not matter. There was, I thought, a glimpse of hope for me in that text. The preacher began thus:—“My dear friends, this is a very simple text indeed. It says, ‘Look’. Now lookin’ don’t take a deal of pains. It ain’t liftin’ your foot or your finger; it is just, ‘Look.’ Well, a man needn’t go to College to learn to look. You may be the biggest fool, and yet you can look. A man needn’t be worth a thousand a year to be able to look. Anyone can look; even a child can look. But then the text says, ‘Look unto Me.’ Ay!” said he, in broad Essex, “many on ye are lookin’ to yourselves, but it’s no use lookin’ there. You’ll never find any comfort in yourselves. Some look to God the Father. No, look to Him by-and-by. Jesus Christ says, ‘Look unto Me’. Some on ye say, ‘We must wait for the Spirit’s workin’.’ You have no business with that just now. Look to Christ. The text says. ‘Look unto Me.’ ”

Then the good man followed up his text in this way:—“Look unto Me; I am sweatin’ great drops of blood. Look unto Me; I am hangin’ on the cross. Look unto Me; I am dead and buried. Look unto Me; I rise again. Look unto Me; I ascend to Heaven. Look unto Me; I am sittin’ at the Father’s right hand. O poor sinner, look unto Me! look unto Me!”

When he had gone to about that length, and managed to spin out ten minutes or so, he was at the end of his tether. Then he looked at me under the gallery, and I daresay, with so few present, he knew me to be a stranger. Just fixing his eyes on me, as if he knew all my heart, he said, “Young man, you look very miserable.” Well, I did; but I had not been accustomed to have remarks made from the pulpit on my personal appearance before. However, it was a good blow, struck right home. He continued, “and you always will be miserable—miserable in life, and miserable in death,—if you don’t obey my text; but if you obey now, this moment, you will be saved.” Then, lifting up his hands, he shouted, as only a Primitive Methodist could do, “Young man, look to Jesus Christ. Look! Look! Look! You have nothin’ to do but to look and live.” I saw at once the way of salvation. I know not what else he said,—I did not take much notice of it,—I was so possessed with that one thought. Like as when the brazen serpent was lifted up, the people only looked and were healed, so it was with me. I had been waiting to do fifty things, but when I heard that word, “Look!” what a charming word it seemed to me! Oh! I looked until I could almost have looked my eyes away. There and then the cloud was gone, the darkness had rolled away, and that moment I saw the sun; and I could have risen that instant, and sung with the most enthusiastic of them, of the precious blood of Christ, and the simple faith which looks alone to Him. Oh, that somebody had told me this before, “Trust Christ, and you shall be saved.” Yet it was, no doubt, all wisely ordered, and now I can say,—

“E’er since by faith I saw the stream

Thy flowing wounds supply,

Redeeming love has been my theme,

And shall be till I die.”

 

I do from my soul confess that I never was satisfied till I came to Christ; when I was yet a child, I had far more wretchedness than ever I have now; I will even add, more weariness, more care, more heart-ache, than I know at this day. I may be singular in this confession, but I make it, and know it to be the truth. Since that dear hour when my soul cast itself on Jesus, I have found solid joy and peace; but before that, all those supposed gaieties of early youth, all the imagined ease and joy of boyhood, were but vanity and vexation of spirit to me. That happy day, when I found the Saviour, and learned to cling to His dear feet, was a day never to be forgotten by me. An obscure child, unknown, unheard of, I listened to the Word of God; and that precious text led me to the cross of Christ. I can testify that the joy of that day was utterly indescribable. I could have leaped, I could have danced; there was no expression, however fanatical, which would have been out of keeping with the joy of my spirit at that hour. Many days of Christian experience have passed since then, but there has never been one which has had the full exhilaration, the sparkling delight which that first day had. I thought I could have sprung from the seat on which I sat, and have called out with the wildest of those Methodist brethren who were present, “I am forgiven! I am forgiven! A monument of grace! A sinner saved by blood!” My spirit saw its chains broken to pieces, I felt that I was an emancipated soul, an heir of Heaven, a forgiven one, accepted in Christ Jesus, plucked out of the miry clay and out of the horrible pit, with my feet set upon a rock, and my goings established. I thought I could dance all the way home. I could understand what John Bunyan meant, when he declared he wanted to tell the crows on the ploughed land all about his conversion. He was too full to hold, he felt he must tell somebody. (C. H. Spurgeon, C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Compiled from His Diary, Letters, and Records, by His Wife and His Private Secretary, 1834–1854, vol. 1 [Cincinatti; Chicago; St. Louis: Curts & Jennings, 1898], 105–108.

 

Note that Spurgeon was not told to come to the front of a church building and repeat a sinner’s prayer, or told to ask Christ to come into his heart–those methodologies did not yet exist, as Dr. Paul Chitwood demonstrates in his history of the sinner’s prayer.  Spurgeon was directed to embrace Christ directly by repentant faith–the right thing sinners should be counseled to do today, and which, enabled by the Holy Spirit through the power of Scripture, will lead to multitudes of true conversions.

 

Note as well that in Isaiah 45:22 the word translated “Look” commonly means “turn.” One turns from his sin to look to Christ alone for salvation–repentance is implicit in saving faith.

 

Spurgeon directed people to embrace Christ directly by faith, rather than telling them that if they sincerely repeated the words of a prayer they would be saved, throughout his ministry.  Here are some examples of the evangelistic counsel he gave to seeking sinners, from his book Around the Wicket Gate (cited from here):

 

When the Lord lifts His dear Son before a sinner, that sinner should take Him without hesitation. If you take Him, you have Him, and none can take Him from you. Out with your hand, man, and take Him at once! When inquirers accept the Bible as literally true and see that Jesus is really given to all who trust Him, all the difficulty about understanding the way of salvation vanishes like the morning’s frost at the rising of the sun.

Two inquiring ones came to me in my vestry. They had been hearing the Gospel from me for only a short time, but they had been deeply impressed by it. They expressed their regret that they were about to move far away, but they added their gratitude that they had heard me at all. I was cheered by their kind thanks, but felt anxious that a more effectual work should be brought about in them. Therefore I asked them, “Have you indeed believed in the Lord Jesus Christ? Are you saved?” One of them replied, “I have been trying hard to believe.” This statement I have often heard, but I will never let it go by me unchallenged. “No,” I said, “that will not do. Did you ever tell your father that you tried to believe him?” After I had dwelt a while upon the matter, they admitted that such language would have been an insult to their father.

I then set the Gospel very plainly before them in as simple language as I could, and begged them to believe Jesus, who is more worthy of faith than the best of fathers. One of them replied, “I cannot realize it: I cannot realize that I am saved.” Then I went on to say, “God bears testimony to His Son, that whosoever trusts in His Son is saved. Will you make Him a liar now, or will you believe His Word?” While I thus spoke, one of them started as if astonished. She startled us all as she cried, “O sir, I see it all; I am saved! Bless Jesus. He has shown me the way, and He has saved me! I see it all.” The esteemed sister who had brought these young friends to me knelt down with them while, with all our hearts, we blessed and magnified the Lord for a soul brought into light. One of the two sisters, however, could not see the Gospel as the other had, though I feel sure she will do so soon.

Did it not seem strange that, both hearing the same words, one should remain in the gloom? The change which comes over the heart when the understanding grasps the Gospel is often reflected in the face and shines like the light of heaven. Such newly enlightened souls often exclaim, “It is so plain; why is it I have not seen it before this? I understand all I have read in the Bible now, though I could not make it out before. It has all come in a minute, and now I see what I never understood before.”

The fact is, the truth was always plain, but they were looking for signs and wonders, and therefore did not see what was there for them. Old men often look for their spectacles when they are on their foreheads. It is commonly observed that we fail to see that which is straight before us. Christ Jesus is before our faces. We have only to look to Him and live, but we make all manner of bewilderment of it, and so manufacture a maze out of that which is straight as an arrow.

The little incident about the two sisters reminds me of another. A much-esteemed friend came to me one Sunday morning after service to shake hands with me. She said, “I was fifty years old on the same day as yourself. I am like you in that one thing, sir, but I am the very reverse of you in better things.” I remarked, “Then you must be a very good woman, for in many things I wish I also could be the reverse of what I am.” “No, no,” she said, “I did not mean anything of that sort. I am not right at all.” “What!” I cried, “Are you not a believer in the Lord Jesus?” “Well,” she said, with much emotion, “I, I will try to be.” I laid hold of her hand and said, “My dear soul, you are not going to tell me that you will try to believe my Lord Jesus! I cannot have such talk from you. It means blank unbelief. What has He done that you should talk of Him in that way? Would you tell me that you would try to believe me? I know that you would not treat me so rudely. You think me a true man, and so you believe me at once. Surely you cannot do less with my Lord Jesus.”

Then with tears she exclaimed, “Oh, sir, do pray for me!” To this I replied, “I do not feel that I can do anything of the kind. What can I ask the Lord Jesus to do for one who will not trust Him? I see nothing to pray about. If you will believe Him, you shall be saved. If you will not believe Him, I cannot ask Him to invent a new way to gratify your unbelief.” Then she said again, “I will try to believe.” But I told her solemnly I would have none of her trying; for the message from the Lord did not mention trying, but said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31). I pressed upon her the great truth, that “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life” (John 3:36); and its terrible reverse: “He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18).

I urged her to full faith in the once crucified but now ascended Lord, and the Holy Spirit there and then enabled her to trust. She most tenderly said, “Oh sir, I have been looking to my feelings, and this has been my mistake! Now I trust my soul with Jesus, and I am saved.” She found immediate peace through believing. There is no other way.

 

There are numbers of resources that can help churches follow the Biblical evangelistic methodology of Spurgeon today, rather than the corrupt “1-2-3, pray after me, 4-5-6, hope it sticks” salesmanship of  people like Jack Hyles. May the number of Baptist churches who counsel the lost Biblically increase greatly for God’s glory and for the multiplication of true conversions.

 

TDR

Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy, part 2 of 2

In part one of this study of Peter Ruckman’s heresy about different ways of salvation in different periods of time, four questions were given for disciples of Ruckman to consider.  This part provides several more questions for those who have adopted or been influenced by Ruckman’s heresy on this issue.

Peter Ruckman heretic multiple ways salvation Rapture dispensationalism KJB1611 Tribulation Law Moses
Peter Ruckman, heretic

5.)   Does the idea that anyone at any time can be saved partially by works deny the depths of the sinfulness of the human heart? Isaiah, confessing what Israel will pray at the end of the Tribulation, affirms: “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (Isaiah 64:6). If even the “best” we can do is a filthy rag—is itself sinful—how can it help one to be saved? We deserve to go to hell for the “best” thing we have ever done, because of how our indwelling sin leads even our “best” actions to be tainted by sin.  Does that not obliterate salvation by works at any time?  If not, doesn’t it strongly impact how we preach the gospel even now?  If Ruckman is right (God forbid), then we can’t tell sinners: “Salvation by works is hopeless and impossible!” but only can say, “Right now God has decided salvation is by faith in this time period, but salvation by works really is possible—the Catholic church is right when it teaches salvation by faith and works; it just puts that way of salvation in the wrong time period.” Isn’t that an attack on the gospel even now?  Is it OK to make salvation by works possible, and salvation by faith alone to be a mere dispensational distinction like whether or not it is OK to eat bacon or lobster?

 

6.)   Why are verses that allegedly teach different ways of salvation in different time periods taken out of context in a major way?  For example, the Ruckmanite pamphlet referenced in part one claims that Revelation 14:12 proves salvation by faith and works in the Tribulation, but it does no such thing—it just proves that true faith will manifest itself in one’s life, a fact that is all over the Pauline epistles (Romans 2:6-7; Ephesians 2:10; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, etc.), all over 1 John, and all over the whole Old and New Testament.  Why is there so much misinterpretation going on?

 

7.)   Would salvation be by faith alone in the Messiah from the Fall until the Tribulation and then suddenly change? Wouldn’t we need very, very clear Biblical evidence for this—evidence that does not exist?

 

8.)   If we accept Ruckman’s claim here:

 

This means that in the Tribulation, you can lose it! … the truth that I’m talking about right now—taught first in 1954—is unknown to Pre-Millennial scholars.  (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Revelation. Pensacola, 1982, p. 413)

 

Wouldn’t the gates of hell have prevailed against the church, contrary to Matthew 16:18; Ephesians 3:21? Was the church teaching lies about the gospel until 1954 when Ruckman came along to explain the truth?

 

9.)   Shouldn’t anyone who teaches multiple ways of salvation stop calling himself a Baptist, since there are no Baptist confessions of faith from the first century until modern times that teach this idea?  One thing that John Davis in his “Why have millions of people suddenly disappeared?” pamphlet and “Time for Truth!” website deserve commendation for is not having the name “Baptist” on his religious organization, but just “The Oaks Church.” That is honest. Someone who teaches ideas about salvation that have never been in any Baptist confession should not call himself or his religious organization a Baptist church.  When will you stop confusing people by dishonestly claiming to be a Baptist, when you reject what Baptists believe?

 

10.)  Ruckman makes many other incredible claims on things like aliens and the color of their blood to secret CIA alien breeding facilities that perhaps he is not credible.  Furthermore, he says: “There are SIX ‘plans of salvation’ in the book of Acts” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin Jan. 2007, p. 16.”  Does such an idea make Acts astonishingly confusing, instead of helping people understand God’s truth?

 

11.) Ruckman also wrote:  “Paul does not hesitate to misapply Habbakuk 1:5-6, in the Church Age” (Ruckman, Peter. How to Teach Dispensational Truth. Pensacola: Bible Believers Press, 1992, 1996, p. 37), claiming that Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, misapplies Scripture.  Such outlandish ideas permeate Ruckman’s teachings.  If we follow Ruckman, are we not leading ourselves into incredible confusion, even apart from the fact that Ruckman’s life indicated that he was not qualified to pastor, based on 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1? (See, e. g., What About Ruckman? by David Cloud).

 

12.) Why do Ruckman’s writings have such a carnal, ungodly spirit, so that one feels defiled by just reading a few pages of them? I have never been able to read through any of his books cover to cover; when I tried I could not get past what seemed like regrettably carnal name-calling.  What if Ruckman wrote in such a carnal way because he was himself a carnal man, not one who Christians should follow?

 

13.) Why do you use Romans 10:9-13 in gospel tracts, when Romans 10:9-10 is quoting Deuteronomy 30:14, and Romans 10:13 is quoting Joel 2:32?  If Romans 10:9-13 proves salvation by grace through faith in this period of time, but not in other time periods, why does Paul quote Deuteronomy 30, from the Mosaic dispensation, and Joel 2:32, which is about the salvation of people in the Tribulation period?  Is Paul misinterpreting the Old Testament, or is Ruckman misinterpreting the Bible?

 

14.) Romans 4:1-8 is one of the classic New Testament texts on justification by faith alone apart from works:s

 

Rom. 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

Rom. 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Rom. 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Rom. 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Rom. 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Rom. 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

Rom. 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

 

Paul proves the glorious truth that God justifies the ungodly apart from works by quoting Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 32:1-2, the experiences of Abraham and of David.  If salvation were by works in Abraham’s day or in King David’s day, how could Paul quote Genesis 15 and Psalm 32 to prove exactly the opposite doctrine, and if there are different ways of salvation in different dispensations, why does Paul prove his doctrine of unmerited salvation from the way people in the patriarchal and legal dispensations were saved?

 

15.) If you cannot answer the questions above, are you willing to reject Ruckman and his false teaching about the existence of multiple ways of salvation?

 

Read part one on Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy by clicking here.

 

TDR

Peter Ruckman: Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy part 1 of 2

You are out of town and are looking for a good church.  After doing online research, you find one and visit.  The church says “Baptist,” “independent.” They go soulwinning, telling people to repent and be saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. They all have King James Bibles. They say nothing about Ruckman. They reject Jack Hyles’s anti-repentance heresies.  They reject CCM, Contemporary “Christian” Music.  They believe in eternal security but are not Calvinist.  They dress modestly and believe in gender distinction.  They reject the charismatic movement.  They reject covenant theology and are dispensational, premillennial, and pretribulational.  Truths such as the resurrection of Christ, the Trinity, etc. are, of course, all believed.  The people are friendly and the pastor preaches with conviction and makes application.  Everything looks great!

 

You go to the tract area to pick up some gospel tracts.  The content seems fine for most of them.  Then you find a pamphlet about the future.  On one side it says: “Very soon millions of people shall suddenly disappear!”  Everything that it says in that part sounds fine.  But on the other side it says “Why have millions of people suddenly disappeared?” and in that section you are shocked when you discover statements that deny the gospel!  In this section, which is addressed to people who miss the Rapture, appear statements such as:  “Remember, to be saved you must put all your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and keep the commandments of God,” and “You can only enter [God’s] Kingdom  if you have put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and … by … keeping the commandments.”  What is going on here?

 

You look at the pamphlet a bit more carefully.  You notice within it a drawing of people going up in the Rapture; one of the graves with a person going up says “Peter Ruckman.”  Hmm.

Peter Ruckman Rapture to heaven cartoon

Then you see that it is published by one “John Davis” who runs a “Time for Truth!” website and helps lead “The Oaks Church.”  You discover that these sectaries are significant publishers of Ruckmanite literature.

 

The church you thought was fine turned out to be one where Peter Ruckman’s heresy that there are different ways of salvation in different time periods is being believed and practiced, although they did not openly proclaim their Ruckmanism.  That is bad.  It is really bad.  Such a church is not one to go back to unless they repent and renounce their heresy on the gospel.  Multiple (alleged) ways of salvation is a false teaching to tolerate “not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you” (Galatians 2:5).  Ecclesiastical separation is commanded by God (Romans 16:17; 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1; Ephesians 5:11; 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14).

 

Ruckman believed an eternally secure salvation by grace alone through faith alone is only for the church age; supposedly in past times for Israel and in future times such as the Tribulation period salvation is not by repentant faith alone, but by faith and works.  What are some questions you can ask someone who believes or is being influenced by this heresy?  Here are a few.

 

1.)   Does the fact that Genesis 15:6 is referenced in Habakkuk 2:4, and these two verses are themselves referenced in James 2; Romans 4; Galatians 3; and Hebrews 10-11 show that justification has always been by faith alone, rather than by works?  (The extremely powerful nature of this development of salvation by faith alone from the patriarchal times of Abraham, through the Mosaic dispensation, into the New Testament is developed in the study “The Just Shall Live by Faith”). Why does Paul prove his teaching of justification by faith alone with these kinds of Old Testament texts?  Don’t these passages show that Abraham, Moses, Habakkuk, James, and Paul all taught the same human response was required to be saved—faith, and faith alone?

 

2.)   For century after century the Jews were singing Psalms with many verses such as: “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (Psalm 2:12). If salvation was ever by works in the Old Testament, why would God command them to sing that ALL who trust in God’s Son are blessed (not “some” are blessed, those who trust and also do enough works to be saved?) Is the Psalter deceiving Israel when it regularly teaches salvation by faith alone?

 

3.)   Why does Peter testify that ALL God’s OT prophets witnessed to justification by faith alone in the Messiah? “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43).

 

4.)   Why is the Old Testament full of the truth of salvation by grace alone? (For example, the Sabbath teaches salvation by faith and resting from works, according to Paul in Hebrews 3-4, so from the very seventh day of creation God’s resting taught man: “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his” (Hebrews 4:9-10). One major reason working on the Sabbath deserved the death penalty was to teach Israel what a grave sin it was to seek to enter God’s salvation rest by effort instead of resting in Jehovah and His provided atonement alone. Likewise, Moses told Israel that their being chosen was sheer and totally undeserved grace (Deut 7:6-8); the very preface to the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-2) indicates that Israel was to obey because they were already a redeemed people, not in order to merit salvation, just as believers today obey because they are already a redeemed people, not to merit salvation.  There are many texts such as: “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price” (Isaiah 55:1-2); how? Through the Messiah, in the immediate context—Isaiah 52:13-53:12; 55:4.

 

Read part two on Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy by clicking here.

 

TDR

Videos on How to Lead an Evangelistic Bible Study

Numbers of churches have found the evangelistic Bible study series here helpful in their practice of Biblical evangelism.  If you have never led someone else through an evangelistic Bible study, the link above provides an example a lost person can watch that could also be helpful for a believer in learning how to do them.  A series of videos on how to teach these Bible studies is also going up on YouTube.  Study #1 on the nature of God’s revelation in the Bible, study #2 on the nature of the Triune God, and study #3, on God’s law and sin’s consequences, now all have extensive exposition, and study #4, on the gospel, namely, on Christ’s redemptive death, burial, and resurrection, is in progress. Lord willing, when they are complete they will provide as much helpful teaching as a solid college class on Biblical evangelism.

 

Watch the series on how to lead an evangelistic Bible study by clicking here.

 

Of course, a fantastic way to learn to do an evangelistic Bible study is to go with your pastor or other experienced soulwinner to regularly preach the gospel, and learn how to do an evangelistic Bible study from that knowledgeable person in your church.  Watching the videos above may supplement, but cannot replace, faithful evangelism in a faithful local independent Baptist church.

 

TDR

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives