Invitation System / Altar Calls

Ted Bigelow: The Natural Man rejects the things of God

Don Johnson wrote:

We see the claim that someone who has called on Christ to be his saviour is still a natural man.

What an attitude!

Better yet, what a theology!

Ignorant men and women are led through an invitation system to a false faith by men proposing themselves as shepherds. The natural man uses such men to gain his selfish goals. After all, the natural man loves nothing more than to be assured that salvation can be his by exerting his own efforts so that he can continue living in the vanity of his filthy mind (Eph. 4:18). Defending such practices serves the one who steals the souls of men by converting them to a false faith. The natural man loves the idea of inviting a god of his own making down to his level and calling on him for salvation. He avoids repentance and Christ’s demands of death to self.

Yes, many will call on Christ, but a non-existent Christ who is only to be magically added to their life of self-love and self-admiration. Their faith in the true Christ is only as deep as shallow soil. They receive no Christ, no Trinity, and no salvation. Hence hear the word of the Lord:

Matthew 7:22-23 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’

Don Johnson: dueling Scriptures

NAU Romans 10:11 For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.”

Actually, the Scriptures are not in conflict. In Mt 7.22-23, Jesus doesn’t say these whom he never knew had EVER called on him. They acted in his name, but they did not call on it.

I say again, what an attitude!

Aaron:

gospel and altar calls

Ted Bigelow wrote:

I don’t want to be snide! But is it possible to grow up in Fundamentalism and thus be unable to see its problems beyond its askew methods?…

A fair question. I think what I’m going to post below will probably help answer it.

Ted Bigelow wrote:

Here’s a fundamentalist dilemma: a preacher tells someone they can receive Christ by walking an aisle and praying a sincere prayer. He also tells the same people that salvation is “by grace alone through faith alone.” The former is a Pelagian denial of the gospel. It that it puts a process on how to be saved, robbing salvation from the hand of a Triune God, and assuming man has the power to get saved. The latter formula of “grace alone through faith alone” was right, but yet the gospel was denied.

I’m no fan of the altar call system but I think there are cases where we are holding altar-calling pulpiteers to a standard of verbal precision that we do not consistently hold ourselves (or others we’re more in agreement with) to. I grew up hearing altar calls but

a. Rarely, if ever, did they say “praying a sincere prayer will save you” in so many words

b. When that was said, there was no confusion on my part about what was meant

c. Doesn’t Rom.10:13 say you’ll be saved by calling on the name of the Lord? (presumably this would be “sincerely” calling)

Now we know Paul was not teaching that the call itself is what saves. How do we know? Because of what he teaches elsewhere. The same is usually true of the “Come forward and be saved” preachers.

Ted wrote:

For the natural man who is at enmity with God, walking an aisle and saying a prayer to “get saved” makes sense. It makes sense to him and lines up with the the catch phrase “by grace alone through faith alone.” But he is left a natural man.

It is really not possible for a person to believe the gospel and confess with mouth and remain a natural man. Rom.10:9-10

So i say it again. Fundamentalism needs not a reform of methodology, but theology. It needs the gospel of the triune God.

Well… I maintain that it has never lacked that gospel, nor has it lacked the Trinity though there are plenty of cases inside and outside of the movement where there has been much neglect of doctrine.

The altar call as practiced by many is problematic, but it is not a defacto denial of the gospel by a long shot.

Aaron: Quote: Don seemed to be

Don seemed to be indicating that some people believe that you can genuinely accept Christ as Savior and still not be saved because you’re not elect. That’s a misrepresentation of Calvinism if that’s what he’s saying. I hope I’m wrong and that he meant something else, but that’s what I took from it anyway.

He was reacting to statements by Ted that seemed to suggest a person could call on the name of the Lord and not be saved… I guess because a preacher said “Walk the aisle and pray and prayer to be saved.” But there’s no way to make Rom. 10:13 fit a scenario where a person truly believes and calls and is still unregenerate afterwards.

Aaron: ed wrote:

The human call in Rom. 10:13 has as much to do with the present day invitation system as air does with the gospel (oops, that one has been used). OK. As much as apples do with oranges.

…

The invitation system is all about what to do to get saved, not worship. It leaves man in the center, just as the unregenerate like it.

I guess I’m not sure what exactly this “invitation system” is you’re talking about. Having grown up hearing a whole lot of invitations, I cannot recall a single one of them in which the event was about teaching people that aisle walking and prayer praying is how people save themselves.

Oddly, these churches (and other types of meetings) were the very places where I learned that there is nothing anyone can do to save himself and he must cast himself on the mercy of God alone. It’s true that there was occasionally some murkiness about exactly how necessary the prayer was (I’m still not sure that’s entirely clear… can a person really believe and repent without communicating something to God about that?). But there was never, ever, any teaching to the effect that it’s my prayer that has the power to save or my walking an aisle that merits my forgiveness.

So whatever the “invitation system” is you’re referring to, it must be one I’ve never seen. Perhaps it dates back more to the time of Finney or maybe it’s more common in Nazarene or Free Will Baptist churches?



Roger Carlson: It is interesting the

It is interesting the “invitation” has come up. I think this is one area where we Fundamentalists need to tweak. I think most know I am a Calvinist. I do use invitations, but they are very soft sell - more to the point they are not MANIPULATION. I think many in are camp do err and do wickedness in their invitations. I used to be one of them. I was at a teen rally a few years back where a nationally known, mainstream evangelist was preaching. He preached three very good messages, but the alter response wasn’t what he wanted (or maybe it wasnt what the promoters wanted). So, at the end of the last message he kept dragging the invitation out to get people walking the aisle. At the end of it, he finally said something to the effect of, “if the Lord has worked in your heart in that last while comeforward.” Many came forward, but was it the Holy Spirit or the manipulation of the Evangelist? I believe it was the latter. When I was in college, this same man taught us “how to give an invitation” in preacher boys. He had someone come up and play a song softly, and said a few things. Many of us wanted to go forward and the Gospel was given nor was the Word preached! It was pure manipulation and it was wicked. This man is a great, Godly man. He means well. But those type of invitations are dangerous because, while God can use them, they typically just get someone to make a “decision” with out the Holy Spirit.

There are many things those of us who are Calvinist have to be vigiliant against (example, fatalism). But this is an area you non Calvinist brothers need to equally guard against. By manipulating people into “decisions” and never be not be saved. That is what happened with me.

Ted:

 Fruit and invitations

Don Johnson wrote:You are asserting that it didn’t occur with the 8 yr old prayer. I would agree, most likely that wouldn’t be it. But did it actually depend on the “genuine acceptance experience” as an adult? How are the two experiences substantively different? Isn’t it possible that true salvation occurred prior to the 8 yr old prayer?



Is it possible?? Of course, its possible, in a realm where anything is possible. But its unbiblical. Those who are born of the born of the Spirit produce the fruit of the Spirit. For this woman to not have the fruit of the Spirit for years requires a simple and humble pastoral call of unregeneracy.

This is simply one reason the altar call/invitation is sooo dangerous. It substitutes the fruit of the Spirit for a humanly generated/manipulated decision.

Don Johnson wrote:

Nevertheless, I am not against giving invitations. Jesus gave them.

Gag. Ack. Stare Where did Jesus ever use anything even remotely resembling the invitation system?

Joseph Leavell: Like Button

We need a “like” button on facebook so that we can “agree” with a person without having to post. Smile Just my opinion. Anyway, since we don’t have one, I “liked” Eric’s post. I agree with you with what you said about salvation as well.

Ted wrote:

Gag. Ack. Where did Jesus ever use anything even remotely resembling the invitation system?



My tongue is in my cheek here, but I’m sure that it stems all the way back to the Tabernacle which was the first tent revival meeting. I’m sure it must have been paved with sawdust. Smile

Don, my grandparents maintained that my mother had been saved at 8 not because of her walk with the Lord but because she prayed the prayer. My mom questioned her salvation all growing up, wondering why she was struggling with Christianity and her parents kept pointing her back to her “profession” as an 8 year old to make her feel better. The only reason she went forward in the first place was because she thought the song-leader wanted something. She fell into deep depression in her 20s because she just decided that she couldn’t do Christianity. She was right. Smile She was trying to do it in her flesh. She got so mad at my dad because at the church they went to “that preacher” always preached against sin! “Doesn’t he know that we’re all saved??? Why keep harping on it all the time?” My dad didn’t hear it at all - he heard sermons on tithing, etc. but she kept hearing some aspect of the Gospel in every sermon. My mom got so depressed that one of her friends gave her a book on depression. The first chapter of the book said, “Perhaps you’re depressed because you don’t truly have a relationship with Jesus Christ.” It hit her like a ton of bricks that all this time she was basing her Christian life on a prayer rather than a relationship with Christ. My dad tells it like this, that my mom met him at the door that day with a smile on her face - that wasn’t normal. Smile She said, “Guess what happened today?” “What?” “I got saved?” “Yeah right! You said you got saved when you were 8!” “No, I said a prayer but I just got saved today!” My dad says, “You know what? My wife got saved that day! The difference in our home from before and after was amazing!”

I use the example of my mom because it’s close to my heart and life. There are many more examples of people who were sold the “pray a prayer and it will save you” “plan of salvation” method to “winning souls” that I personally could mention. How many unsaved people are there in our pews because they were sold that to be saved you just need to ask Jesus into your heart or say this prayer with me as I close and if you said this prayer come forward or mark it on a decision card and that means you’re saved? I shudder to think how many people will not be in heaven because they were sold a false gospel of “You don’t want to go to Hell do you? Well, congratulations, you prayed the prayer so now you’re saved”? How many trusted in a prayer rather than trusted in Christ in a self-centered attempt to get out of hell free, and never entered into a personal relationship with Christ as a result of the Gopsel?

Don:

Joseph Leavell wrote:

I use the example of my mom because it’s close to my heart and life. There are many more examples of people who were sold the “pray a prayer and it will save you” “plan of salvation” method to “winning souls” that I personally could mention. How many unsaved people are there in our pews because they were sold that to be saved you just need to ask Jesus into your heart or say this prayer with me as I close and if you said this prayer come forward or mark it on a decision card and that means you’re saved? I shudder to think how many people will not be in heaven because they were sold a false gospel of “You don’t want to go to Hell do you? Well, congratulations, you prayed the prayer so now you’re saved”? How many trusted in a prayer rather than trusted in Christ in a self-centered attempt to get out of hell free, and never entered into a personal relationship with Christ as a result of the Gopsel?

Hi Joseph

I do appreciate the story. And I am not saying that in this specific incident the assessment isn’t true, it seems the testimony as you state it is accurate. But I have often heard of “I’ve finally got saved” testimonies after a life that seemed to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit for years. I think some of these stories exhibit confusion on what salvation is.

In response to the quoted paragraph, I am against easy believism. I think a lot of damage has been done by poor gospel presentations and giving false assurance. But please be aware that this isn’t a fundamentalist problem. I grew up in evangelicalism and it was rampant amongst the evangelicals I knew. Our camp ministries were full of it, our churches often assured unbelievers they were fine. This is a VERY wide-spread problem. The vitriol directed against fundamentalism for this problem is entirely inappropriate. Fundamentalism has nothing to do with this problem, even though the problem is present in fundamentalist churches.

As for Jesus and invitations: the conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount is an invitation (Mt 7.21-27), also see Mt 11.28-30 and Lk 11.9-13 and Jn 6.53-58.



Joseph Leavell: Don wrote:

But I have often heard of “I’ve finally got saved” testimonies after a life that seemed to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit for years. I think some of these stories exhibit confusion on what salvation is.



The key word here is “seemed.” A lot of us who grew up in church are good little actors. I know I can be one when I walk in the flesh. I call this exibition “wax fruit” because it has the appearance of Spiritual fruit, but lacks real substance. Whether it’s a believer walking in the flesh or an unbeliever who is basing their conversion on a prayer, it doesn’t matter. It’s still not Spiritual produce. Judas sure looked like a convincing disciple to the other 11, didn’t he?

Don wrote:

I think a lot of damage has been done by poor gospel presentations and giving false assurance. But please be aware that this isn’t a fundamentalist problem. I grew up in evangelicalism and it was rampant amongst the evangelicals I knew.

You’re right Don. This is why conservative evangelicals have been so unique - they have refuted both the new evangelicals AND the fundamentalists in their easy believism.

Regarding the Scriptural invitations, I don’t remember Jesus asking people to come forward on the 5th verse of Just as I Am. I think that’s the point that others are making about invitations. Invitations exist, yes, but the modern, peer pressure, guilt trip, emotional based invitation is not found in Scripture. Just to be sure, I’m not saying you’re advocating this kind of invitation.

Don: don’t slip into propaganda

Joseph Leavell wrote:

The key word here is “seemed.” A lot of us who grew up in church are good little actors.

True. But I’m not talking about people like that.

Joseph Leavell wrote:

This is why conservative evangelicals have been so unique - they have refuted both the new evangelicals AND the fundamentalists in their easy believism.

I don’t think they are unique. Many people are concerned with easy believism, including some fundamentalists you would no doubt reject. My point is simply that it isn’t a “fundamentalist problem” and it is just propaganda to rail against fundamentalism as if it is in the nature of fundamentalism to produce this problem.

Ted:

The Invitation of Jesus vs. the Invitation System

Don Johnson wrote:

As for Jesus and invitations: the conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount is an invitation (Mt 7.21-27), also see Mt 11.28-30 and Lk 11.9-13 and Jn 6.53-58.

Nobody questions whether Jesus invited people to repent and believe. But that is 180 degrees different than the invitation system that you claim was like what Jesus used in posts 7 and 36.

Jesus never recommended, asked for, or encouraged in any way possible a physical action on behalf of any sinner as a way to obtain the benefits He promised. Yet, the invitation system does this every Sunday.

Why is this distinction so important?

Because to call on the sinner to repent and beleive is biblical. In that action they must call on the Lord and despair of any thing they can do, or possess, to get saved. They have to rely on God alone. But to ask them to physically do something to gain salvation (come forward, pray a prayer,etc.) is to teach them synergism, and to participate in a false gospel that saves not. They naturally rely on what they are doing, feeling, and experiencing.

They do something, and then “get saved.” It is false salvation, and the pews of many churches are filled with unbelievers as a result. The very men - the pastors - who should be telling them about how to look away from self, and look to the perfections of Christ for all heavenly blessing, instead tell them to look to their own decision, or coming forward. On the day of judgment, the works of such ministers will be wood, hay, and straw - no value. They have not honored Christ. Not only that, the souls of those deceived people will condemn these men forever for leading them away from Christ.

If you want to be a straight up man, please provide us with a single instance of Jesus doing anything that even remotely smacks of the present day invitation system, in which the sinner is told to do something to gain the benefits God offers the sinner. But I’m guessing you won’t.