Decision Theology

[Lanman87]

Obviously, a moment's brainstorm is not necessarily a genuine "conversion experience" to say nothing of the fact that accepting Christ as one's Lord and Savior should mean knowing what Lord and Savior really mean and imply, not just following the instructions given by some minister to everyone in the audience at once and then to repeat a few words from him.

From someone who came from this environment, I can tell you that the vast majority of people who "are converted" aren't people who just walk off the street. Most are children who were raised in Sunday School, VBS, Children's Choir, and who's parents have a well formed faith of their own.

Adults who "are converted" most often are people who were invited to church by friends or family and attend for months or even years before making a public declaration of faith.

While it may seem like spontaneous emotional reactions most often someone "being converted" is the result of countless people praying for talking to, teaching, and loving the person who ends up "converting".

 

[Albion]

From someone who came from this environment, I can tell you that the vast majority of people who "are converted" aren't people who just walk off the street. Most are children who were raised in Sunday School, VBS, Children's Choir, and who's parents have a well formed faith of their own.

That's a valid point, I agree. However, I was reading a broadly supportive claim on behalf of altar calls, etc. which did not make such a distinction.

If someone had indeed spent a lifetime attending church, being in Sunday School, etc. but had never made any kind of personal commitment to Christ as Lord and Savior, and if the invitation were offered by the local pastor in that church every Sunday, this would be much closer to what I recommended.

While it may seem like spontaneous emotional reactions most often someone "being converted" is the result of countless people praying for talking to, teaching, and loving the person who ends up "converting".

...in the cases you are referring to now. But again, that wasn't how the question was originally framed. See your post #4 which set up the discussion and in which you laid out a considerably different scenario than the one you are talking about now.

 

[Lanman87]

Surely, but it would be a big mistake to attribute this widespread trend to such churches as you mentioned not relying upon "altar calls" to build membership.

I'm not, I'm just saying having an alter call or not having one doesn't seem to matter. Both groups have people making professions of faith in some form or fashion and then later on leave the Church and Christianity all together.

 

[Albion]

I'm not, I'm just saying having an alter call or not having one doesn't seem to matter. Both groups have people making professions of faith in some form or fashion and then later on leave the Church and Christianity all together.

Okay, but the fact is that this is not the reason--or even one of the most important reasons--for the recent decline in membership experienced by denominations of both sorts.

 

[Lanman87]

...in the cases you are referring to now. But again, that wasn't how the question was originally framed.

Even in the few cases when someone "walks in off the street" and responds to the alter call the most common story we heard was that the person had started feeling convicted of their sin and was looking for relief, started reading the Bible on their own and wanted more understanding, or watched a church service on TV that got them thinking about what happens when they die.

 

[Albion]

Even in the few cases when someone "walks in off the street" and responds to the alter call the most common story we heard was that the person had started feeling convicted of their sin and was looking for relief, started reading the Bible on their own and wanted more understanding, or watched a church service on TV that got them thinking about what happens when they die.

That's to describe little more than a person who's just gotten interested in God and the Bible, not someone who's ready to make the most important decision of his life.

For them to succumb to the one-size-fits-all urging of an altar call is a mistake, and such a church really should not encourage it. It's far better when the church eschews such gimmicks and instead leads such people through the other process.

That said, this discussion started with a topical "jump ball," asking for opinions. Mine is as I have stated it, but that doesn't mean that I condemn the other approach, especially not as you have more recently described the cases you want to spotlight. The intention behind altar calls is good, I agree. What we're talking about still is just a matter of which approach is to be preferred.

 

[Lanman87]

That said, this discussion started with a topical "jump ball," asking for opinions

The reason for the jump ball is that I'm struggling with this in my mind.

On the one hand, we always want to be preaching the gospel and giving opportunity for people to respond to the work of the Holy Spirit. One good reason for an alter call is that we never know who may be in attendance that God is convicting of sin and their need for salvation and bringing to faith. Be it someone who has been in church their entire life or someone who walked off the street.

On the other hand, we don't want to manipulate people in to making a profession of faith from "peer pressure" or "everyone else is getting saved I guess I should as well" mentality. This is a valid criticism of what I've seen often. Either scaring people into faith (believe in Jesus or your going to burn in hell) or over promising a life of faith (Believe in Jesus and all your troubles will go away) can both be things that result in "false professions".

Any profession of faith/conversion should be the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. Not because we are skillful at creating emotional or even intellecutal responses to the Gospel.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

If we have had a "change in heart wrought by the Holy Spirit" shouldn't there be a response from us of repentance and faith? Isn't "repentance and faith" the necessary reaction to being regenerated?

If there has been a "change in heart wrought by the Holy Spirit", faith has already done its work. The "necessary reaction" is often misunderstood. What we actually have is a logical response to what's already been done, not what's left to be done, but this is also the work of the Spirit in us

 

[Albion]

The reason for the jump ball is that I'm struggling with this in my mind.

Sure, but I was just saying there that you offered the readers an open question to deal with. That's unlike the threads that start off with a declaration of what the author believes about some doctrine or other, leaving the readers to fight against it or else offer 'high fives.' Your approach was much better IMHO.

On the one hand, we always want to be preaching the gospel and giving opportunity for people to respond to the work of the Holy Spirit. One good reason for an alter call is that we never know who may be in attendance that God is convicting of sin and their need for salvation and bringing to faith. Be it someone who has been in church their entire life or someone who walked off the street.

But don't you think that the church has a responsibility and an interest in not misleading any of those people? That's what altar calls by their nature risk.

They don't even try to distinguish between those who are prepared to make such a decision and those who are known to the church itself to not be even close to being prepared, to knowing their own mind, or to having enough knowledge of Christ and the Bible to make such a choice. The call is simply sent out to everyone who's present.

Why, for instance, does the minister not make the appeal be for those who are in the audience and feel themselves ready to make a commitment (or close to it) to come forth and sign up, with the deacons, for instruction classes leading to a formal declaration and baptism...but not to being "saved" on the spot by repeating a few words that are not even the candidate's own?

 

[Josiah]

But don't you think that the church has a responsibility and an interest in not misleading any of those people? That's what altar calls by their nature risk.

They don't even try to distinguish between those who are prepared to make such a decision and those who are known to the church itself to not be even close to being prepared, to knowing their own mind, or to having enough knowledge of Christ and the Bible to make such a choice. The call is simply sent out to everyone who's present.

I agree.


IF a church believes that we don't "decide" for Jesus but rather we are declaring the faith God has previously given to us, then... well... it seems at least deceptive to make "Altar Calls."

But I think it's worse than that. Because IN MY EXPERIENCE, "decision" Protestants tend to be radical synergists, they have been told and they believe that Jesus actually saves no one, Jesus just makes it POSSIBLE for all to be saved... that the Holy Spirit GIVES nothing, the Spirit only OFFERS something... that those heaven-bound are so because THEY did something, THEY provided the key factor, THEY are the one who gets the credit. They tend to hold that Jesus isn't the Savior but the POSSIBILITY MAKER, the Holy Spirit isn't the giver of anything but just divine HELP. They seem to point to THEIR "decision" in stead of to the Cross. We've heard this from such Protestants right here at CH.

IMHO, this view undermines the Christian Gospel and endangers faith and I agree with Luther that it can create a "terror of the conscience" as they wonder if they REALLY did decide, if they REALLY did their part good enough.... In God I trust, in me... well.... not so much.


Soli DEO Gloria!


- Josiah



.

 

[Albion]

But I think it's worse than that. Because IN MY EXPERIENCE, "decision" Protestants tend to be radical synergists, they have been told and they believe that Jesus actually saves no one, Jesus just makes it POSSIBLE for all to be saved... that the Holy Spirit GIVES nothing, the Spirit only OFFERS something... that those heaven-bound are so because THEY did something, THEY provided the key factor, THEY are the one who gets the credit. They tend to hold that Jesus isn't the Savior but the POSSIBILITY MAKER, the Holy Spirit isn't the giver of anything but just divine HELP. They seem to point to THEIR "decision" in stead of to the Cross. We've heard this from such Protestants right here at CH.

This would seem to pose a real problem for a person who's contemplating a move from an "Evangelical" church to one that's of the Reformed tradition, wouldn't it?

 

[Lanman87]

Why, for instance, does the minister not make the appeal be for those who are in the audience and feel themselves ready to make a commitment (or close to it) to come forth and sign up, with the deacons, for instruction classes leading to a formal declaration and baptism...but not to being "saved" on the spot by repeating a few words that are not even the candidate's own?

In the last Southern Baptist church I attended if someone responded to an alter call they were taken to another room by a trained (For lack of a better word) counselor. The job of the counselor was to make sure the person understood the basic facts of the gospel message.

When I was in my 20's I was one of those counselors at a Youth Evangelism Weekend. We had training on how to discern a work of the Spirit from emotional/cultural conversion. Obviously, we were fallible young adults but if you ask "why did you come forward?" and the answer is "Because my best friend did" then you know something is off.

We did our best to make sure people who came forward understood the following:

1. That I am a sinner and separated from God
2. Who Christ is and what He has done for us
3. That faith is more than simple belief but a trusting and surrender to the Lordship of Christ
4. That repentance and seeking Godliness is a necessary element and evidence of faith
5. That Baptism is the next step for a new believer

Only if the counselor believed the person truly understood the gospel and the implications would they be asked to say "the sinner's prayer". If the counselor believed the person didn't understand what they were doing they would be referred to a pastor/elder for further counseling.

We also got instructions on what to do if someone came forward and said I'm being abused, or I'm a drug addict or some other heavy issue that we weren't qualified to deal with. I'm thankful I never had anyone tell me anything like that, but I know of others who had to deal with those issues.

At any rate, new believers are often placed in a "New Believers" class after which they would be baptized. . 35 years ago my pastor and I went through Survival Kit for New Believers together. My Dad was a deacon and my Mom taught Sunday school and I had been to church three times a week since I was born. I didn't learn a thing in the new believers class.

Obviously, my experience is within a particular church in a particular denomination. I share all of this to maybe helps folks not in the tradition to understand that it might not be as shallow and emotion driven as it appears on the surface.

 

[Lamb]

We did our best to make sure people who came forward understood the following:

1. That I am a sinner and separated from God
2. Who Christ is and what He has done for us
3. That faith is more than simple belief but a trusting and surrender to the Lordship of Christ
4. That repentance and seeking Godliness is a necessary element and evidence of faith
5. That Baptism is the next step for a new believer

1. Yes, we are sinners...good to point that out. It gives us the Law which is necessary.
2. Yes, proclaim Christ.
3. Surrender? Where does the bible say the word surrender is faith? It doesn't. That's added on by your denomination.
4. Repentance is another work that God does within us, we can't turn to Him unless He does the turning.
5. Baptism is yet another thing that God does for us. We can't baptize ourselves. It's His work.

 

[Lanman87]

But don't you think that the church has a responsibility and an interest in not misleading any of those people?

Isn't that a pessimistic approach. Isn't it better to preach the gospel and assume that those that respond are doing so because God has moved them to faith and repentance?

How is it misleading to preach "Believe and you will be saved"?

 

[Lanman87]

3. Surrender? Where does the bible say the word surrender is faith? It doesn't. That's added on by your denomination.

Everywhere the Bible tells us to deny ourselves, offer ourselves as living sacrifices, to be transformed by the renewing of our mind, and live by faith is a call to surrender our devotion to ourselves and our own personal kingdom to the Lordship of Christ and His Kingdom. Faith is trusting Christ and that faith involves an element of surrender. If Christ is Lord of our life we will take up or cross daily and follow Him.

4. Repentance is another work that God does within us, we can't turn to Him unless He does the turning.

I agree, We can't repent unless God is at work in us convicting us of our sins. However, from a practical purpose Repentance and Faith are inseparable. Any claim of faith that isn't accompanied by repentance and ongoing sanctification isn't a "saving faith". We can choose to "not repent" and if we are honest most of us would agree that our repentance is not perfect. We still give into sinful temptation even when our desire is to live a godly life.

5. Baptism is yet another thing that God does for us. We can't baptize ourselves. It's His work.

Again, we can choose to not be baptized. So while baptism is a work of God we also make a conscious choice to be baptized.

 

[Albion]

Isn't that a pessimistic approach.

Not at all. It's being responsible. What's more, I just read you explaining with some detail how, in the congregation you were part of earlier, much care was taken by the counselors, etc. etc. in order to satisfy themselves about the readiness of the candidate. Were they pessimists to do that?

That aside, I have the feeling that you presented us with an open question, although you did provide us with a lot that bolstered the altar call view of things, but after all these exchanges, you have reinforced your Baptistic orientation and distanced yourself from other Christian traditions, including the Reformed one that you made reference to at the start of the thread. Would you agree, or what is it that you think now?

 

[Lees]

Why is it necessary that 'we' as Christians can identify who and who is not a true believer?

We intrude on things that only God can know.

Only God and Christ knew Judas was not a believer. And yet for their purposes, he was allowed to remain.

We just must do what God requires of us. Preach the Gospel. Let the chips fall. God will get done with it what He wants.

Lees

 

[Lamb]

Everywhere the Bible tells us to deny ourselves, offer ourselves as living sacrifices, to be transformed by the renewing of our mind, and live by faith is a call to surrender our devotion to ourselves and our own personal kingdom to the Lordship of Christ and His Kingdom. Faith is trusting Christ and that faith involves an element of surrender. If Christ is Lord of our life we will take up or cross daily and follow Him.


I agree, We can't repent unless God is at work in us convicting us of our sins. However, from a practical purpose Repentance and Faith are inseparable. Any claim of faith that isn't accompanied by repentance and ongoing sanctification isn't a "saving faith". We can choose to "not repent" and if we are honest most of us would agree that our repentance is not perfect. We still give into sinful temptation even when our desire is to live a godly life.


Again, we can choose to not be baptized. So while baptism is a work of God we also make a conscious choice to be baptized.

Surrender isn't a condition in order to have faith though as your list implies. We don't surrender in order to have faith.

 

[Lanman87]

Were they pessimists to do that?

No, they were pragmatic. It allows for the fact that God sometimes brings people to Himself in a dramatic and instantaneous way. The assumption is that the move of God is real unless there is a reason to believe otherwise.

It also understands that a conversion is a Spiritual Experience/Move and not a purely intellectual or emotional event. And while intellectual understanding and emotions are involved ultimately it is God moving on a person's heart and soul and that movement can and does happen in various ways for various people.

Would you agree, or what is it that you think now?

I am, for lack of a better term, playing the devils advocate. I'm defended a position to see what holes there are in the position.

My concern is that the reaction to "alter calls are bad" is that we rarely evangelize by calling for people to believe and repent. The New Testament is full of the Apostles telling people to believe. John says he wrote his gospel account so that people would believe. John 20:31. It seems that maybe we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater in reaction to the bad things we perceive in "alter calls".

The fact is, evangelical churches are full of people who responded to alter calls, said the sinner's prayer, and live life of faith in Christ whom they love and serve. Surely that count be completely discounted.

 

[Lanman87]

Surrender isn't a condition in order to have faith though as your list implies. We don't surrender in order to have faith.

I didn't mean to imply that surrender is a prerequisite for faith. But that surrender, obedience, faithfulness, repentance... are the result of a true living/saving faith. You don't surrender to Christ in order to have faith you surrender to Christ because you have faith.