I've Been Wondering

[Brenda T] True Evangelism

I was looking for a text edition that I can convert to Kindle (to do my own formatting) and this link provides it.

Amazon

[JD Miller]

Don, thanks for the link. After seeing that, I figured I’d better order quick before the price went up, but I decided to check with half.com first. I got my copy for 75 cents plus $3.49 shipping.

You saved THOUSANDS today, you ought to go out and treat yourself to something!

I wholly agree with Chafer’s approach to the invitation. Thanks for citing it.

Thanks Brenda. I downloaded it.

Before everyone jumps on the Chafer bandwagon, let us remember that his influential Systematic Theology laid out the Biblical case for “easy-believism.” Chafer’s school (Dallas Theological Seminary) promoted a repentance-free salvation and led many prominent men down that particular road.

I cannot speak for Dallas Seminary, but Chafer certainly did not promote a repentance-free Gospel. He merely made repentance a part of believing. His was a distinction without a difference:

In the foregoing, an attempt has been made to demonstrate that the Biblical doctrine of repentance offers no objection to the truth that salvation is by grace through faith apart from every suggestion of human works or by merit. It is asserted that repentance, which is a change of mind, enters of necessity into the very act of believing on Christ, since one cannot turn to Christ from other objects of confidence without that change of mind. Upwards of 150 texts - including all of the greatest Gospel invitations - limit the human responsibility in salvation to believing or faith. To this simple requirement nothing could be added if the glories of grace are to be preserved. (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 3:378).

You cannot read Chafer’s soteriology and come away with the concept of easy-believism. Read Chapter 20 in his soteriology for more on his views of the terms of salvation.

It’s been pointed out to me by a friend. Chafer’s book was first published in 1911-1919 . As Dr. Rice was born in 1895, he was between 16 and 24 in the period. So, the discussions Dr. Rice had with Moody Press in the late 40s was about Moody’s reprinting of the work.

My friend wrote one reason for Dr. Rice’s opposition was Chafer’s position on the work of an evangelist as commonly understood. My friend quoted

“The evangelist of the Scriptures is, without question, the messenger to the unevangelized, preparing the way for the pastor and teacher in his more constant ministry in the church. The evangelist, therefore, finds his fullest divine mission as a pioneer missionary to the hitherto unevangelized” (Chafer, 6).

The charge of Chafer’s “easy believism” is the normal ad hominem. He did not teach that just as Ryrie does not.

“To impose a need to surrender the life to God as an added condition of salvation is most unreasonable. God’s call to the unsaved is never said to be unto the Lordship of Christ; it is unto His saving grace… . The error of imposing Christ’s Lordship upon the unsaved is disastrous even though they are not able intelligently to resent it or to remind the preacher of the fact that he, in calling upon them to dedicate their lives, is demanding of them what they have no ability to produce… . The most subtle, self-satisfying form of works of merit is, after all, found to be an engaging feature in this practice of applying to unbelievers the Lordship of Christ… . Such notions are only human adjustments to God and resemble in no way the terms of divine adjustment, which first condemns man and rejects his supposed merit, and then offers a perfect and eternal salvation to the helpless sinner on no other terms than that he believe on Christ as his Savior… . If the importance of attention to this wide difference between the saved and the unsaved is not appreciated and respected by the preacher, the fault is nearly unpardonable since the results may easily hinder the salvation of many souls. Next to sound doctrine itself, no more important obligation rests on the preacher than that of preaching the Lordship of Christ to Christians exclusively, and the Saviorhood of Christ to those who are unsaved.” (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 3:385-387)

Chafer’s concluding thoughts in his Systematic Theology, Vol. 3:

”In the preceding pages it is also pointed out that the New Testament declares directly and without complication in at least 150 passages that men are saved upon the sole principle of faith; and, in this connection, it has been demonstrated that it is not a matter of believing and repenting, of believing and confessing Christ, of believing and being baptized, of believing and surrender to God, of believing and confessing sin, or of believing and pleading with God for salvation, but it is believing alone.” (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 3:392,393)

Each of us can draw our own conclusions as to whether or not such a teaching led to modern-day “easy-believism.” Chafer does not believe that there is any connection between salvation and the decision to turn from one’s sin or to make Christ the Lord of one’s life.

So you don’t believe in depravity? That is what Chafer is talking about. That has nothing to do with “easy believism”.

in any way except in minute by minute decisions to choose to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit and the commands of the Word of God. Making Jesus Lord isn’t a one time decision. Turning from sin isn’t a one time decision…it is life. I do it better some times and not so good at others.

It’s a rainy day and I’m killing time until I have to go off to work. Thought I’d share this excerpt from Chafer’s True Evangelism, where he continues his relentless attack against “methods” in evengelistic preaching;

It is also clear that the transcendent undertaking of salvation is wholly a work of God, since its every phase depends upon a power that surpasses the whole range of human strength. Because of this, the condition of salvation is reasonable, which demands only an attitude of expectation toward God. In preparation for this, the blinded and self sufficient person must not only be so wrought upon that he will want to be saved ; but he must see his utter helplessness apart from the power of God and the sacrifice of the Cross, and this, in spite of the blinding and opposition of Satan who energizes him (Eph. ii. 2). Who is sufficient for these things ? Surely not the eloquent preacher or the pleading evangelist! God alone is sufficient ; and He has fully provided for the necessary preparation of mind and heart in the all-important conviction of the Spirit (p. 66-67).