How does God want Christians to profit concerning evangelism from Acts 22:14-15?
Acts 22:14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. 15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
This passage reveals what God directed Ananias to say to Paul when Paul was brought to Damascus after his encounter with the risen, glorified Jesus. Based on what Ananias said to Paul, what do we learn about how God wants Christians to profit concerning evangelism from this revelation?
- 220 views
[Kevin Miller]
Do you have any explicit biblical data to support your assumption that in one or more cities Paul preached part of the content in one message and then preached the rest of the content in one or more subsequent messages to the same exact group of people?
Also, do you hold that Paul picked and chose what he preached on any given occasion based on whatever he felt like preaching?
Did Paul sometimes preach evangelistically in his initial witness to people by telling them about the Resurrection but not the Cross?
To be consistent, you have to answer the third question affirmatively because to answer it otherwise is to go beyond the explicit Scriptural data that we have.
What exactly is your position about what Paul preached everywhere and is your position supported by Scripture?
[RajeshG]Well, we know Paul was in Corinth for three and a half years. I highly doubt he preached the exact same message every time he preached. Is that really what you think he did?Do you have any explicit biblical data to support your assumption that in one or more cities Paul preached part of the content in one message and then preached the rest of the content in one or more subsequent messages to the same exact group of people?
Also, do you hold that Paul picked and chose what he preached on any given occasion based on whatever he felt like preaching?Why would you think I might hold to that? I suppose that can be an accurate way of describing how one experiences the Spirit’s leading when determining what to preach. Can one be led by the Spirit without feeling the Spirit’s leading? Probably not.
Did Paul sometimes preach evangelistically by telling people about the Resurrection but not the Cross?If Paul already had knowledge that they knew about the cross, then It’s certainly possible he could go directly to the resurrection. The Holy Spirit led Paul to preach what the people needed to hear.To be consistent, you have to answer the third question affirmatively because to answer it otherwise is to go beyond the explicit Scriptural data that we have.
What exactly is your position about what Paul preached everywhere and is your position supported by Scripture?My position about what Paul preached every where is the New Testament. He wrote a great many of those books, you know. It seems highly likely that he also preached much of the same content that he wrote down, though we don’t have direct Scriptural evidence of most of his exact preaching messages.
He did write this in Colossians 1:24-26 24 Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. 25 I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness— 26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people.
So that is telling me that what he preached everywhere was the word of God in it’s fullness, but that certainly could not have been done in just one message that he repeated over and over at all times in all places. In some places, the people received more individual teaching and preaching because Paul stayed there longer, and some places had to rely more on reading his words once he had written them down.
[Kevin Miller]Well, we know Paul was in Corinth for three and a half years. I highly doubt he preached the exact same message every time he preached. Is that really what you think he did?
This is not the answer to the question that I am getting at, and I think that you know what I am driving at. Do you have any evidence that Paul purposely omitted parts of the evangelistic message that he was commanded to preach by only preaching some parts of it in his initial message and preaching other parts on later occasions? If so, what rationale can you provide for his picking and choosing to do that? How do you know that he did that on any occasion?
[Kevin Miller]Because your position in effect seems to have to hold that Paul routinely disobeyed God in the situations that he only had one opportunity to preach to people. Paul, however, claims otherwise in Acts 26—he said that he was not disobedient but preached the essential content that he was commanded to preach everywhere.Why would you think I might hold to that? I suppose that can be an accurate way of describing how one experiences the Spirit’s leading when determining what to preach. Can one be led by the Spirit without feeling the Spirit’s leading? Probably not.
[Kevin Miller]But that’s not the point that I’m driving at. For example, did Paul preach the Cross at the Areopagus or not (Acts 17)? If you say that we can only say what is explicitly recorded, then Paul preached the Resurrection but not the Cross on that occasion even though it was his first (and as far as we know his only) opportunity to preach to those people.If Paul already had knowledge that they knew about the cross, then It’s certainly possible he could go directly to the resurrection. The Holy Spirit led Paul to preach what the people needed to hear.
The same holds true for many other instances such as the Philippian jailer, Lydia, etc. If you hold that we can only say that he preached what is recorded, then you hold that there were many instances where Paul evangelized people without preaching the Cross and yet Paul was somehow still obedient to his mission.
[Kevin Miller]This thread is specifically about the content of Paul’s evangelistic witness. What you are saying here is not really relevant to the topic of this thread.My position about what Paul preached every where is the New Testament. He wrote a great many of those books, you know. It seems highly likely that he also preached much of the same content that he wrote down, though we don’t have direct Scriptural evidence of most of his exact preaching messages.
He did write this in Colossians 1:24-26 24 Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. 25 I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness— 26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people.
So that is telling me that what he preached everywhere was the word of God in it’s fullness, but that certainly could not have been done in just one message that he repeated over and over at all times in all places. In some places, the people received more individual teaching and preaching because Paul stayed there longer, and some places had to rely more on reading his words once he had written them down.
[RajeshG]Oh, but it is. Your insistence on what Paul preached at all times in all places to all people is based, from what I understand you to be saying, on “Paul’s mission.” When I mention a verse in Colossians about Paul’s full mission, you try to claim that you are talking about that mission but only about an evangelistic mission. I just don’t see how you can separate his preaching evangelistically from his entire preaching and teaching mission and say obedience to his mission meant he had to say some things every time he preached to all people in all places at all times, but other parts of his mission did not require that same level of obedience.This thread is specifically about the content of Paul’s evangelistic witness. What you are saying here is not really relevant to the topic of this thread.
We simply don’t have Scriptural evidence of what he preached in every single one of his messages, whether they were evangelistic messages or discipling messages or messages about future events, and we certainly don’t know that there was a clear dividing line between those types of messages. They intersect on so may levels, so it’s just odd to me that you are emphatically adamant about particular information that you think MUST have been included in his preaching to all people in all places at all times.
[Kevin Miller]Of course, we know with certainty that there is a very clear dividing line between evangelistic messages and other types of messages. God has stipulated specific content that unsaved sinners must hear and accept in order to be saved. Once they have been saved, there is a vast amount of additional revelation that they are to be given.We simply don’t have Scriptural evidence of what he preached in every single one of his messages, whether they were evangelistic messages or discipling messages or messages about future events, and we certainly don’t know that there was a clear dividing line between those types of messages. They intersect on so may levels, so it’s just odd to me that you are emphatically adamant about particular information that you think MUST have been included in his preaching to all people in all places at all times.
In addition, in the opening post, I established very plainly that the subject of this thread was to be truth concerning evangelism. My interest in this thread is to promote greater understanding of what the Bible teaches about evangelism, especially from Acts 22:14-15—it is not to get into a lengthy discussion of what either Paul or anybody else was/is obligated to do in other settings or respects.
[Kevin Miller]No, Paul did not preach the New Testament everywhere; there was no collection of books called the NT during his lifetime. In fact, God had not even inspired the writing of a number of NT books during most of Paul’s lifetime and there were several books that Paul never knew anything about.My position about what Paul preached every where is the New Testament. He wrote a great many of those books, you know. It seems highly likely that he also preached much of the same content that he wrote down, though we don’t have direct Scriptural evidence of most of his exact preaching messages.
He did write this in Colossians 1:24-26 24 Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. 25 I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness— 26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people.
So that is telling me that what he preached everywhere was the word of God in it’s fullness, but that certainly could not have been done in just one message that he repeated over and over at all times in all places. In some places, the people received more individual teaching and preaching because Paul stayed there longer, and some places had to rely more on reading his words once he had written them down.
No, Paul did not preach everywhere the word of God in it’s fullness. As I have said before, we do not have any evidence that he even had more than one opportunity to preach to many people.
[RajeshG]So are you telling me that Paul was disobedient to the commission that he said God gave him to present the word of God in it’s fullness? Colossians tells us that that was what his commission was. Do you deny that? Just because we don’t have record of what Paul preached or what he may have received from God, that doesn’t mean he was failing to live up to his commission. My point has been that Paul could present the book of Romans to the Romans and the book of Ephesians to the Ephesians, and so on, and he would have been fulfilling his mission of presenting the word of God in it’s fullness, even if he did not present the entire word of God to each individual group. I don’t see Paul’s commission, even his evangelistic commission, requiring him to say the same particular, specific information to all people at all times in all places. That was your initial assertion and you haven’t presented any Scriptural evidence to show that that needed to be done to fulfill his mission.No, Paul did not preach the New Testament everywhere; there was no collection of books called the NT during his lifetime. In fact, God had not even inspired the writing of a number of NT books during most of Paul’s lifetime and there were several books that Paul never knew anything about.
No, Paul did not preach everywhere the word of God in it’s fullness. As I have said before, we do not have any evidence that he even had more than one opportunity to preach to many people.
[RajeshG] God has stipulated specific content that unsaved sinners must hear and accept in order to be saved.I’m just curious. In your perspective, if a person has not been told about the resurrection appearances when they make a decision to follow Christ, would you consider them NOT to be saved since they hadn’t heard that information?
[Kevin Miller]No, I am not saying anything about Paul’s being disobedient to God in any respect. You continue to try to make this a discussion about aspects of Paul’s ministry that do not pertain to evangelism. The facts about what Paul says in Colossians do not support what you are trying to do with that statement about his preaching the word of God in its fullness.So are you telling me that Paul was disobedient to the commission that he said God gave him to present the word of God in it’s fullness? Colossians tells us that that was what his commission was. Do you deny that? Just because we don’t have record of what Paul preached or what he may have received from God, that doesn’t mean he was failing to live up to his commission. My point has been that Paul could present the book of Romans to the Romans and the book of Ephesians to the Ephesians, and so on, and he would have been fulfilling his mission of presenting the word of God in it’s fullness, even if he did not present the entire word of God to each individual group.
When Paul wrote Colossians, he was in prison. He wrote the book of Colossians to people that he had never seen in person. We do not have any evidence in Scripture that Paul was ever in Colosse to minister anything to them in person.
He was not the person who evangelized them. Colossians is not an evangelistic message; therefore, it is not biblical revelation that primarily informs us about what Paul did in his evangelism in fulfillment of that aspect of his mission.
[Kevin Miller]As all the apostles were, Paul also absolutely was commanded to preach in his evangelism the same gospel everywhere to every unsaved person. He did not have any freedom to omit essential information just because he felt like it …
I don’t see Paul’s commission, even his evangelistic commission, requiring him to say the same particular, specific information to all people at all times in all places. That was your initial assertion and you haven’t presented any Scriptural evidence to show that that needed to be done to fulfill his mission.
Paul did not continually invent the essential content of that evangelistic message and preach widely varying different content to different people according to whatever he felt like preaching.
[Kevin Miller]Christ Himself warned that there would be many who in effect will claim to have made “a decision to follow Christ” and not be true believers (Matt. 7:21-23). What matters most is what a person who claims to be saved does when he does hear what the Bible says. People who doubt or reject the biblical revelation about Christ rising bodily in the same body (albeit in a glorified state) in which He died on the Cross are not to be given any assurance that they are true believers.I’m just curious. In your perspective, if a person has not been told about the resurrection appearances when they make a decision to follow Christ, would you consider them NOT to be saved since they hadn’t heard that information?
[RajeshG]No, I am not saying anything about Paul’s being disobedient to God in any respect. You continue to try to make this a discussion about aspects of Paul’s ministry that do not pertain to evangelism. The facts about what Paul says in Colossians do not support what you are trying to do with that statement about his preaching the word of God in its fullness.
I looked back over the thread and I see where I began to get confused as to whether we were talking about an evangelistic mission or Paul’s full mission. You brought up Act 22:14-15 as your text regarding why Paul said certain things in his evangelistic encounters. At one point, you said, “Acts 22:14-15 says that Paul was to be Christ’s witness to all men of what he himself had seen and heard.” You put the emphasis on to all men, so I started thinking your words applied to Paul’s every message to all men, especially when Acts 22:14-15 itself gives Paul a larger mission than just evangelism. So you yourself used verses that gave Paul his entire ministry mission of preaching everything God would ever reveal to him, and you used those verses to try focusing on just one part of his ministry, that of evangelism, and to focus on specific information that Paul had to preach just when he was evangelizing. The problem is that those verses do not focus just on evangelism, so they do not support your view that certain things were his mission to preach only during evangelistic encounters. That’s why I was confused and kept bringing up his entire ministry.
As all the apostles were, Paul also absolutely was commanded to preach in his evangelism the same gospel everywhere to every unsaved person. He did not have any freedom to omit essential information just because he felt like it …Okay, so what I get from these sentences is that we need to determine from Scripture what is “the same gospel” that every apostle preached. What do the Scriptures state as this “essential information” or “essential content of the evangelistic message?” The content in I Cor 15:3-8 does seem to support your view that Paul was telling of the resurrection appearances when he delivered the gospel. Paul mentioned Cephas, then the twelve, then 500, then James, then all the apostles, and then Paul himself. So is it your understanding that the whole list is essential information, and was relayed by Paul every time he evangelized? Do we need to memorize this list ourselves in order to obediently evangelize?Paul did not continually invent the essential content of that evangelistic message and preach widely varying different content to different people according to whatever he felt like preaching.
Are there any other indications from Scripture, besides this one passage, that resurrection appearances are essential content when delivering the gospel?
[RajeshG]Wouldn’t this be true of any biblical revelation, that if someone rejects it, they can’t have assurance they are believers. The Bible tells us to assemble together with other believers, so if a person rejects that and does not obey, then they can’t really have assurance. The Bible tell us Christ is returning again to take us to be with Him. If someone rejects that, then they can’t have assurance. Does this make “obedience to God’s commands” or “belief in the Second Coming” to be understood as “specific content that unsaved sinners must hear and accept in order to be saved.” Are the resurrection appearances somehow different than these other two things?Christ Himself warned that there would be many who in effect will claim to have made “a decision to follow Christ” and not be true believers (Matt. 7:21-23). What matters most is what a person who claims to be saved does when he does hear what the Bible says. People who doubt or reject the biblical revelation about Christ rising bodily in the same body (albeit in a glorified state) in which He died on the Cross are not to be given any assurance that they are true believers.
[Kevin Miller]Comparing Scripture with Scripture suggests that the list of Resurrection appearances that the Apostles testified to when evangelizing people can be stated more succinctly than what Paul gives in 1 Cor. 15. Paul himself may have done so, at least as it is reported to us in Acts 13:Okay, so what I get from these sentences is that we need to determine from Scripture what is “the same gospel” that every apostle preached. What do the Scriptures state as this “essential information” or “essential content of the evangelistic message?” The content in I Cor 15:3-8 does seem to support your view that Paul was telling of the resurrection appearances when he delivered the gospel. Paul mentioned Cephas, then the twelve, then 500, then James, then all the apostles, and then Paul himself. So is it your understanding that the whole list is essential information, and was relayed by Paul every time he evangelized? Do we need to memorize this list ourselves in order to obediently evangelize?
Acts 13:30 But God raised him from the dead: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.
Acts 13:31 is one summary statement about Resurrection appearances in Scripture. Acts 10 provides another one from Peter’s premier gospel message in Caesarea:
Acts 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
Furthermore, all 4 Gospels end with varying information concerning Resurrection appearances, which also suggests that essential information can be communicated in different ways.
Memorizing and testifying what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:5-8 is perfectly legitimate, but using the other statements also accomplishes the same task.
[Kevin Miller]All 4 Gospels include that information after they have testified to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Peter said that the Apostles had to be witnesses of His resurrection (Acts 1:22), which required more than just saying that He rose.Are there any other indications from Scripture, besides this one passage, that resurrection appearances are essential content when delivering the gospel?
[Kevin Miller]The resurrection appearances are different than those other two things because we have an explicit apostolic statement that the gospel that he preached included testimony to the resurrection appearances (1 Cor. 15:1-8).Wouldn’t this be true of any biblical revelation, that if someone rejects it, they can’t have assurance they are believers. The Bible tells us to assemble together with other believers, so if a person rejects that and does not obey, then they can’t really have assurance. The Bible tell us Christ is returning again to take us to be with Him. If someone rejects that, then they can’t have assurance. Does this make “obedience to God’s commands” or “belief in the Second Coming” to be understood as “specific content that unsaved sinners must hear and accept in order to be saved.” Are the resurrection appearances somehow different than these other two things?
Discussion