Charles Finney is noted for being the first person to employ the "altar call" during worship services in the 1800's. I have some doubts about this popular ritual. I believe that the "service" itself is an invitation holistically, or it should be. In my opinion, the altar call is an honest method that has been learned and inherited from our past church leaders; however, should we limit ourselves to just one method? Here are some concerns from an article by Jim Ehrhard called "The Dangers of the Invitation System:"
1. There is no clear biblical precedent or command related to the modern public invitation or altar call. It’s true that Christ did say things like “Follow Me” and “If you confess Me before men” but to assume that Jesus gave altar calls is really just a failure to be honest with the text. Jesus did call people to Himself, and we should call people to Christ, but there is no example where He or the apostles appealed to people to “come forward” as a testimony of their decision in some way. The reality of it is He was never speaking in terms of this “one time” decision that you would make about Him, but it was the idea that you’re going to choose to follow Christ all your life. He taught that the one true mark of true faith is a life that would continually confess Him before men. Furthermore, Jesus was speaking to His disciples when he said, "If you deny me before men...." not to a crowd of the unsaved....
2. Many today associate “coming to faith” with the idea of “coming down the aisle.” There is confusion here. I mean, to some extent, the sermon itself has already shown the need of a change in those who don’t know Christ. So, the invitation is represented as providing the opportunity for such change to take place.
Perhaps the hearer is told they need to “let Jesus come into their heart.” These all end up being man-made directives. “Let Jesus come into your heart,” “Come to faith,” “Come down the aisle,” “Give your life to Christ”—all of those end up being really shallow substitutes, I think, for true biblical directives—“Repent,” “Believe,” “Trust”—that are clear in scripture.
The "sinner’s prayer" came to be attached to the altar call, but this too is not found in scripture as we see it today. I’m very aware of the prayer that the publican prayed. I think we’ve got to remember something: a prayer is not what saves somebody. Christ is the One who saves. When God wants to quicken someone and give them the ability to repent and believe (saving faith), He can do that totally independent our help, or getting the words right in a prayer, or whether any words were articulated! He knows their heart.
1. There is no clear biblical precedent or command related to the modern public invitation or altar call. It’s true that Christ did say things like “Follow Me” and “If you confess Me before men” but to assume that Jesus gave altar calls is really just a failure to be honest with the text. Jesus did call people to Himself, and we should call people to Christ, but there is no example where He or the apostles appealed to people to “come forward” as a testimony of their decision in some way. The reality of it is He was never speaking in terms of this “one time” decision that you would make about Him, but it was the idea that you’re going to choose to follow Christ all your life. He taught that the one true mark of true faith is a life that would continually confess Him before men. Furthermore, Jesus was speaking to His disciples when he said, "If you deny me before men...." not to a crowd of the unsaved....
2. Many today associate “coming to faith” with the idea of “coming down the aisle.” There is confusion here. I mean, to some extent, the sermon itself has already shown the need of a change in those who don’t know Christ. So, the invitation is represented as providing the opportunity for such change to take place.
Perhaps the hearer is told they need to “let Jesus come into their heart.” These all end up being man-made directives. “Let Jesus come into your heart,” “Come to faith,” “Come down the aisle,” “Give your life to Christ”—all of those end up being really shallow substitutes, I think, for true biblical directives—“Repent,” “Believe,” “Trust”—that are clear in scripture.
The "sinner’s prayer" came to be attached to the altar call, but this too is not found in scripture as we see it today. I’m very aware of the prayer that the publican prayed. I think we’ve got to remember something: a prayer is not what saves somebody. Christ is the One who saves. When God wants to quicken someone and give them the ability to repent and believe (saving faith), He can do that totally independent our help, or getting the words right in a prayer, or whether any words were articulated! He knows their heart.
3. A large number of people who are “converted” during altar calls fall away. Statistics show extremely high numbers of those “converts” never show any competent signs of being converted—maybe even the vast majority! I think it's ironic that toward the end of his life, Charles Finney, after reflecting on the many who claimed conversion, but have since fallen away, had mixed thoughts about the genuineness about his work. On another note, the altar call can be the extension of an appeal for public decision and may result in purely emotional or mental response that is just some sort of catharsis. It’s a catharsis for the emotional pressure of the event, maybe the emotional pressure of the drama or the singing or the sermon—and this is a catharsis, and persons who respond to such an appeal, then, falsely assume that their action had made them right with God.
4. Scripture already explains how a convert is to make his profession public. The scripture gives us God’s way of publicly making confession of belief in Christ. People make professions, people join the church, and on and on, but when it comes to confession of Christ though—making a profession of Christ—presenting somebody that’s just made a profession as a true believer, when you don’t know anything about them, that’s so dangerous.
Baptism is God's way of publicly professing your belief, not "walking an aisle" So, in their testimony of their baptism, they show to the world their identity with Christ. I
5. For some, the use of an altar call uncovers, I believe, a lack of trust in the sovereignty of God.
It’s an overzealous and maybe even immature kind of way of thinking, that “If we don’t provide an opportunity to respond to the gospel, someone might leave and never have an opportunity to be saved and their blood will be on our hands. I think it is a theological problem in our churches today. It’s a misunderstanding of the sovereignty of God in salvation. Scripture makes it clear that salvation is of the Lord—every aspect of it. Our role is faithfulness and obedience to the Lord; a desire to please the Lord; to be faithful to Him. And if we’re not faithful to evangelize and to call people to repentance, that is sin on our part, but the eternal destiny of some soul is in God’s hands, not mine. It’s His job to convert sinners. It’s ours simply to be faithful, being faithful to preach the Word and leave the results to God. This was the method used by Jesus I believe—preaching truth! It was the method used by the apostles, the reformers, the puritans, and almost everybody until the 1830’s—and that was simply to proclaim the truth, call men to repent and believe, to leave the results in the hands the Holy Spirit who alone can do that
4. Scripture already explains how a convert is to make his profession public. The scripture gives us God’s way of publicly making confession of belief in Christ. People make professions, people join the church, and on and on, but when it comes to confession of Christ though—making a profession of Christ—presenting somebody that’s just made a profession as a true believer, when you don’t know anything about them, that’s so dangerous.
Baptism is God's way of publicly professing your belief, not "walking an aisle" So, in their testimony of their baptism, they show to the world their identity with Christ. I
5. For some, the use of an altar call uncovers, I believe, a lack of trust in the sovereignty of God.
It’s an overzealous and maybe even immature kind of way of thinking, that “If we don’t provide an opportunity to respond to the gospel, someone might leave and never have an opportunity to be saved and their blood will be on our hands. I think it is a theological problem in our churches today. It’s a misunderstanding of the sovereignty of God in salvation. Scripture makes it clear that salvation is of the Lord—every aspect of it. Our role is faithfulness and obedience to the Lord; a desire to please the Lord; to be faithful to Him. And if we’re not faithful to evangelize and to call people to repentance, that is sin on our part, but the eternal destiny of some soul is in God’s hands, not mine. It’s His job to convert sinners. It’s ours simply to be faithful, being faithful to preach the Word and leave the results to God. This was the method used by Jesus I believe—preaching truth! It was the method used by the apostles, the reformers, the puritans, and almost everybody until the 1830’s—and that was simply to proclaim the truth, call men to repent and believe, to leave the results in the hands the Holy Spirit who alone can do that
1 comment:
Hope you get this: I like the idea being shared here. I also agree w/ some of the issues being raised.
Post a Comment