“And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,”
Hebrews 9:27
Thanks to an email tip from one of my “battle buddies” early this morning, I began listening to a set of sermons delivered at the 2008 ‘Resolved’ conference. I have only listened to the first session (Rick Holland preached from the above text) and rest assured I will be listening to it several more times, with paper and pencil handy for copious notes. My current thoughts are not specific to the sermon itself, but to the words of the above text in the context of several conversations I have listened to in ‘Christian’ Blogland, that perfectly reflect the current system of ‘respectful tolerance and dialogue’ that must be adhered to when discussing spiritual matters with those who reject God. ‘Respectful tolerance/dialogue’ means that believers are not allowed to say anything remotely confrontational like…well, the Gospel! The intent is, I suppose, to get them to a point of liking us so much that we can somehow subtlety ask them if they have ever considered the claims of Christ, sometime later as we stroll hand-in-hand down Sweetness Lane.
Here’s the issue…
In Hebrews 9:27, we have the first portion of a larger point made by the Apostle Paul concerning Christ’s dying once for the sins of many. The message of these few words, even outside of the context of Paul’s discourse, is crystal clear – you die and face the judgment of God. Both of the ‘main camps’ of Protestant Christianity (Calvinists and Arminians), most heartily agree on this verse, regardless of their thoughts about matters of choice, free will, or predestination and maybe even share pancakes at the local IHOP while they discuss it! The question I have is for those who subscribe to the synergistic view of salvation, that is to say that man’s choice, made after hearing the Gospel, is the determining factor in his/her eternal destiny.
Here’s the question:
How is it that you can have an endless ‘respectful dialogue’ with an avowed atheist (or anyone you know to be an unbeliever), that fails to include the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when the person with whom you are conversing might face death the on the very day of your ‘respectful dialogue’, maybe moments after the conversation, or maybe during it! Hear me out. According to your view of salvation, it’s his/her decision to end up in Heaven or Hell. You have the chance to provide that person with the facts necessary for the ‘eternal’ decision. You fail. The death angel comes calling, it’s a done deal. The one with whom you had a nice little ‘sans Gospel’ philosophical chat will NEVER have another chance to make a ‘decision’, but will face The Lord of Glory, bow the knee, proclaim Him Lord, then march off to an ETERNITY IN HELL!
How can you do that? How did I?
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
The Battle Cry 
You can’t. As a follower of Christ. At some point ether by the actions of how you live and love them, or by the spoken word you introduce them to Christ.
More times than not I have just loved the person, and they have asked me why I do the things that I do. My actions open the door to let me teach them the gospel. Even Jesus when on this earth had people come to Him because of the actions of his miracles. He then told them the truth of why He came to earth
There are times though were I flat out ask or put it out there.
But you are right, it is our duty to “Go preach and teach to all nations” the Gospel of Christ.
LikeLike
Good Morning and thanks for stopping by, ck! You are absolutely right, it is our duty, honor and privilege to share the Gospel, to ‘preach’ it. Sometimes we know or have a distinct feeling (hopefully the Holy Spirit and not just mine) it is the perfect time, and sometimes not. Knowing that in the end, salvation is ALL the work of God (Romans 8:29-30, determined in the councils of heaven before our time began) is a great comfort, but no excuse to leave it to someone else.
It also means we are at risk of losing friendships and shattering treasured relationships, sometimes those we value the most.
I remember once years ago, when in a theater full of Special Forces soldiers, enduring the periodic mandatory ‘Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention’ class, during the Q&A, one of men stood up and after complimenting the speaker on a really good presentation (those weere rare), he respectfully remark that a possible solution had been omitted from the talk and said “His name is Jesus.”, and sat down.
The silence was deafening, at least one other soldier accused him of ‘preaching’ and others later quietly thanked him for standing up, including one Chaplain.
So be encouraged my friend, have a great day, and keep putting it out there!
LikeLike
Several thoughts:
1. I am obeying God’s call on my life.
2. I view respecting a person as loving, and ultimately a part of sharing the gospel.
3. I don’t have ‘endless’ conversations; I pursue authentic relationship with others. In those relationships, where I’ve won the trust of the person, I can share the good news in words and they listen and respond. Timing (really leading) of the Holy Spirit is everything.
4. Sharing the Gospel is much more effective without words.
5. If I proclaim/proselytize I play into their ill-conceived notions about religion and that makes it that much harder to convey truth.
6. In my experience, the direct approach isn’t effective – they’ve heard it before, and they are ready (and really more interested) in doing battle over the peripheries of faith. I prefer not to walk into that trap.
7. Ultimately, it’s not my responsibility if they respond to God’s call – it’s their choice; I am merely a vessel or conduit (maybe).
I understand the urgency – there are so many dying every minute of every day. We should all be doing whatever we can to share the gospel at any moment at any time.
Probably the #1 atheist in my life is my own father. My father is a die-hard atheist, and refuses to engage in any discussion of spiritual matters. I’ve tried everything.
He’s heard the four spiritual laws; the roman road; the way of the master; I’ve tried loving ,respecting, engaging in theological/philosophical dialogue, reason, logic, and debate. Nothing works.
You wanna take a crack at him?
LikeLike
1. Great!
2. So do I, and If I love them, I WILL include the gospel in the ‘respectful dialogue’, not intentionally leave it out of the dialogue as seems to be the current trend in many places.
3. Relationship is great, but there might not be time. In that case what is of greatest import, the ‘authentic relationship’, or their eternal soul.
4. I think you are wrong on that one. The Gospel REQUIRES words. Simple words, but WORDS at some point. Where is your scripture for that one?
5. We are ALWAYS to proclaim, NEVER to proselytize. That’s the Holy Spirit’s department (The Lord of the Harvest).
6. Not a lot of experience, huh? Seriously, I remember something about telling the truth in Love – direct truth, no bait and switch. If the Lord of the Harvest is present it works every time to accomplish what God intended in every circumstance.
7. Correct, but it IS your responsibility to PROCLAIM the Gospel, and let God be sovereign.
Concerning your father, forget ‘methods’, love him, pray that God soften his hard heart, and continue to proclaim the truth in love when the opportunity arises. Since he has heard the message (the preaching) in several different ways, maybe PRAYER is THE option at this point. Remember God’s love and sovereignty in His electing decrees.
Again, thanks for stopping by, really!
LikeLike
Hey, Dan! If the burden is on my shoulders to get someone to make the choice for Christ, then I better stop at nothing. I better be sure I’ve made any and every attempt to “get them saved” or “seal the deal.”
Since the burden is not on my shoulders, it’s already decided before the foundation of the world, I trust God to speak to the individual’s heart. When it pleases Him to do so, He will reveal Himself to whomever He will.
Does that mean I don’t have any responsibility? No. We’ve been told to preach the gospel, be ready in season and out of season to preach the word. So then, the question arises, when have I said enough? None of my telling and retelling the gospel message is going to move the hand of God to change anything that has been predetermined. I am to faithfully show by my actions and with my words the truth of the gospel. In the course of life together, a friend or family member may finally have the veil removed. I may have been a one of the ones who planted the seed of truth that finally took root. But the credit is not mine, it’s not the unsaved, it’s the Lord’s who lifted the veil.
Whatcha think?
LikeLike
Amen…
LikeLike
Dan,
I think we’ve been through this before. The question is not whether the gospel is spoken but when and how. I think our methods vary, and if you’re doing what you’re being told to do by the Holy Spirit and I am too – then there isn’t an issue.
Statements like “I think you are wrong on that one” and “Not a lot of experience, huh?” I find to be rude and disrespectful. There are unbelievers “watching” this dialogue and are very attuned to how we treat each other – and our behavior towards one another is clearly dictated by Jesus. Being rude and disrespectful is not being Christlike – and the words spoken do not excuse the tone or behavior.
Responses to your responses:
2. The dialogue is specifically designed to share the gospel; it is by no means casual conversation. My dialogue with an unbeliever is very intentional – even though I may not initially say words like “Jesus” or “Hell.”
3. What is of greatest import is to be obedient to the leading of the Holy Spirit – which will be different depending on the circumstance.
4. For scripture, I point to the Gospels; specifically, the model of Jesus in his recorded encounters with unbelievers. His words were very different for each person based on his knowledge of what they needed to hear and to what they would be able to respond affirmatively. There is also the quote from St. Francis of Assisi, “Minister always, when necessary use words.” – that is to what I was primarily referring.
6. Believer for 29 years; active ministry for 24 of those years, so yeah – quite a bit of experience actually and I stand by my original statement particularly as it pertains to conversations with atheists.
7. It’s not my responsibility to proclaim the gospel as much as it is my responsibility to make disciples. Discipleship implies a long term relationship so laying the foundation for a long-term relationship is a significant part of my approach to evangelism. That is, if I’m going to walk through a salvation experience with someone I better be prepared to continue to walk with that person in intentional relationship for the next 3 to 5 years until they are ready to produce fruit on their own. Again, the model for this is Jesus’ own ministry while on earth.
LikeLike
b4d,
I still THINK you are wrong saying “Sharing the Gospel is much more effective without words.” That is not rude. I asked where you find that thought of yours in scripture? You pointed to the Gospels and Jesus encounters with unbelievers. Granted, those show how he approached different people differently and we should follow that example. How we approach people is NOT the gospel message. Here is the gospel message defined by Paul:
“Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,” 1 Cor 15:1-5
How can you deliver that message WITHOUT words, unless you have a different different definition of the gospel. Because of that message, much is demonstrated ‘without words’ that can be said to be part of the overall gospel narrative, but all those things, in my mind, are not THE gospel. Perhaps that is where we got our wires crossed.
By following the other ‘rude’ comment with “Seriously” I thought you would have picked up on thelight sarcasm. Here again, as some point the ‘direct’ message of the gospel needs to be shared. If the listener has a heart prepared to hear the gospel message, even the direct approach will work going in. We run into trouble when we think it is our job to ‘persuade’ or talk someone into making a decision that may or may not be genuine.
I am not sure I understand your number 7. The making of disciples begins with the proclamation of the gospel. Being a disciple/Christ follower is possible without having heard or received the gospel message, but that discipleship is nothing more following a good moral example. There are a lot of sincere folks following a whole lot of moral examples straight to hell.
Of course the leading of the Holy Spirit is important. In this particular post is sort of a ‘what if’ scenario, assuming that my personal perspective of salvation is that it occurs with someone’s complete and total ‘free will. Given that scenario and assumption, what if today I have a chance to share the gospel (with words) that if received and believed would mean another soul for the Kingdom of God, and I don’t. That person dies that day without having had the chance to accept of reject Christ I could have provided him/her. What have I done?
I emphasize ‘with words’ becuse without the ‘words’ of the gospel message being heard and believed in, the chances of salvation that day are slim to none.
I leave you with these words of scripture from Romans 10 that you are probably familiar with already. they speak for themselves concerning ‘words’:
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. “How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”
LikeLike
That final scripture is actually an even better verse to use with Jesus’ words of “not everyone who calls me ‘lord, lord’…” You should have brought that verse up over at my blog.
I think your [Paul’s] definition of the Gospel is incomplete – at least, I don’t see any instructions on how to respond to the hearing/understanding of “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.”
Where we are disagreeing, I think, is not that words need to be used, it’s what words and when. When I said the gospel is more effective without words, I was paraphrasing St. Francis of Assisi. I guess he was wrong too.
The implication I’m making is that the core of the gospel message (as you’ve/Paul has defined it) needs to have context and be explained to most people who ‘hear’ it today.
The atheists I know certainly have heard this snippet of the Gospel before. Their unresponsiveness requires one of two actions: 1. kick the dust off our shoes and move on from them, or 2. engage them in relationship to try and get them to the point of receiving the Gospel for themselves.
“The making of disciples begins with the proclamation of the gospel.” I would agree, if there were the latitude to present the gospel in a manner other than, or in addition to simply reciting Paul’s words which you’ve cited above. If that exact recitation is to what you are referring here, then I would say you are wrong.
You are also wrong in saying that the leading of the Holy Spirit is important – I would say it is essential. The “what if” scenario you’ve presented is solely dependent on your responsiveness to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Your responsibility ends there. Do what you are told. Period. No more, no less. Make sense?
LikeLike
I guess you will have to take up the completeness/incompleteness of Paul’s message with Paul. That is his definition. The message itself does not have to also include/define the response. The response is the response, not the message. Naturally I would include the proper response as part of the discussion. When heard by the Holy Spirit prepared heart, ‘believing follows, sometimes with a verbal injunction to believe, or sometimes not.
Concerning ‘what words’- if the words used do not clearly and accurately communicate the problem of sin, Christ’s atoning sacrifice (substitutionary atonement, and the need for repentance, then whatever the words might be, the message is incomplete.
I wasn’t pinging on St. Francis, God rest his soul. I was saying that his quote can be an excuse NOT to share the words when it is God’s time. That happens a lot. We think the job’s done because we performed an act of kindness.
All I am saying is that the gospel message in clear terms of Christ’s death for our sins, and His resurrection, needs to be expressed/communicated. Concerning discipleship, anyone can be a follower of Christ as a ‘moral example’ but if that person has not received the gospel and believed in Christ, it is an exercise in ‘following a moral example’, something that can be done with Buddha, etc. I could WWJD everything in my life and still end up in the hot zone.
“You are also wrong in saying that the leading of the Holy Spirit is important.”
It’s not? If it’s essential, it has to be AT LEAST important. That’s pure linguistics. BTW, how do I know if the ‘spirit’ telling me to witness, or not to witness with words, at any given time is the Holy Spirit, or my flesh? I would say that the PRESENCE of the Holy Spirit in the ‘transaction’ is what is essential, not necessarily my perceived ‘feeling’ that I am being prompted by the Holy Spirit at any given moment.
For clarity, I will restate that position. The recognition of the leading of the Holy Spirit is important but might not always be evident, but the PRESENCE of the Holy Spirit is essential.
LikeLike