They want to see that a Christian can be a free-thinking person, not just a blind follower and repeater of words, and Scripture quoting doesn't portray that. Base the answers you give on Scripture, but don't resort to blind quoting. . . .I happen to believe that people are more open to converting when they witness Christians behaving in accordance with the Bible than they are when a Christian simply tells them what the Bible says. When a Christian's actions represent the words and the Word they are using, that is far more powerful and successful than simply listing off some passages at someone, however good those passages might be. . . .It's much better to use Scripture quoting in combination with just plain conversation. Instead of just quoting, explain what it means! Use the person's questions as a means of teaching them what God means, and relate to their fears and questions. And sometimes it's best just to go away and let people think for a while.

Thank you for the suggestions. It's all about living the Word, yes? Isn't that what Jesus did? During His 33 years on this earth, everything Jesus said and did illustrated the Word. Why? Because He is the living Word. We need to be Christians who turn the world upside down [Acts 17]--through the power of the Holy Spirit, not let the world turn us upside down.

I think it's so easy for Christians to try and convert people, but it's the Holy Spirit's duty, not ours. We're just included in the process. We should be befriending people, not trying to get another convert for our tally board (that's incredibly disrespectful of the person and of God).

Excellent point. We can't save or convert anyone anyway. The Holy Spirit does that. It's more than His duty. He's literally the only One who CAN.

When you say to a non-Christian, "God loves you so much that he sent his only Son to say the world from sin and death to give eternal life. You only have to believe these things and you to will be saved." To them it may sound more like, "Believe what is said in this 2,000 year old book, even though you have a totally different world-view and therefore don't understand where I'm coming from or the importance of it all, because you don't believe in God, Satan, angels and demons, and Heaven and Hell." If they believe none of these things and are told them and are 'preached at', it's not likely they'll respond favourably.

I read an anecdote in a book on mission history the other day. And the verse you paraphrased, John 3:16, God used, through a female missionary, as His two-edged sword to save a woman in India [late 19th century]. She thought it profound that God would love her so much to die for her. And in that moment, she gave her heart to Jesus.

As Christians we can offer words of hope when they're in their darkest times.

Agreed. But God has to create the dark times. And He has to give us the wisdom to know what to say to the person who's suffering.

@Gandalfs Beard: remember our discussion on Christianity vs. other religions? Which is right and which wrong? Or if all are just different roads to the top? Well, have you read The Last Battle lately? The Narnians worship Aslan, while the Calormenes worship Tash. But the ape Shift deceives Narnia with the poorly-dressed donkey Puzzle as Aslan. And he forces the talking animals into slavery, making a deal with the Calormenes.

Lamb: "We belong to Aslan. They belong to Tash. They have a god called Tash. They say he has four arms and the head of a vulture. They kill Men on his altar. I don't believe there's any such person as Tash."

Shift's response: "Tash is only another name for Aslan. All that old idea of us being right and the Calormenes wrong is silly. We know better now. The Calormenes use different words but we all mean the same thing. Tash and Aslan are only two different names for you know Who. That's why there can never be any quarrel between them. . . .Tash is Aslan: Aslan is Tash."

King Tirian's reaction: "He meant to go on and ask how the terrible god Tash who fed on the blood of his people could possibly be the same as the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved."

Who is Aslan supposed to represent in the Chronicles of Narnia? Jesus Christ, the lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world--for our sins. And who is Tash? Not another god but a demon with a temple, and a statue/idol in it, dedicated to him. Tirian: "It was carved in stone and overlaid with gold and had solid diamonds for eyes." This demon flies over Tirian and his friends' heads on its way to the stable hut. Why? Shift or the Calormenes called for it.

"Tash is Aslan: Aslan is Tash." This is the great lie! They are not the same! Shift, the Calormenes, and the unbelieving Narnians find that out for themselves, but by then it's too late. They've made their choice.

We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

So, GB, what's your choice? Jesus Christ, or a god who is no god? Jesus Christ is not like other gods. He is Supreme! You must make a choice. Aslan and Tash aren't the same, remember?

But 220, if we follow through completely with this Tash/Aslan example, we must remember that Emeth, a devout worshiper of Tash, who rejects Aslan his whole life is granted access to the True Narnia. If we want to relate this to real world religions, that would mean that a true worshiper of Ganesh or Allah or Odin or Whoever could also be granted access to Paradise. I know this is a popular subject over in the Narnia & Christianity board. Narnia isn't a direct allegory, after all.

Here's something else that seems odd to me. Christians are monotheistic: belief in one god, and one god only. If this One God is real and exists and is the only one, then there are no other gods to worship. I happen to believe that other religions are valid, just not valid in quite the right way. Maybe once upon a time, before Jesus, they were valid. Without the direct instruction from God that the tribes of Israel had (lucky them, huh?), after the Tower of Babel, all the other cultures were left to figure it out for themselves, and hence...other religions! Whether or not that makes following them now a good idea or not...I'm still working on that one.

As I have mentioned before, my Bible Study group is doing a Bible Study on the topic of if other religions lead to God too, so I find the debate about different religions interesting. I was wondering, Gandalfs Beard, and any other non-Christians if you would be willing to summarize your basic beliefs.

GB - I know you have been stating your beliefs somewhat in other posts but a summary would be nice. Feel free not to answer any of my following questions, since the answers are really none of my business (I am extremely curious, in general):
You seem to know a lot about religions, to what extent have you studied them (ex. gotten a general overview of their beliefs, read their scriptures, etc)?
Assuming you have taken the time to study / learn about different religions, why have you done so?

A common symptom of the Jerks for Jesus is the insistence upon sowing and reaping in one encounter, the instant decision. Thus aggravating a few Calvinists along with the free-willies: since when is it your decision, they would say.

Before addressing an issue — bandied about in the last dozen or so posts — that I believe is more important, let me briefly discuss this one, as one of the Calvinistic Cabal here on the forum.

If I’m witnessing to someone, and have gotten so far as to present both Law (you sin, you die, and you definitely sin) and Gospel (Jesus took the penalty for sin to provide redemption and eternal life) to them, then you bet I will definitely be asking someone for a “decision.”

Why? After all, I do believe that no one can be saved unless God draws such a person — and He will succeed every time He truly tries. I also know that truly witnessing to someone is more about getting a notch-on-the-belt. And I’m very sure that pressure via emotionally based or business-based methods for a “conversion” is Biblically wrong.

The reason why is because I know that the God Who ordains what will happen will also ordain the means for what will happen, such as if someone repents and calls on His Name.

This is almost exactly like the better time-travel stories, in which someone goes back into the past and himself causes a chain of events that leads to what he already knows from history books actually occurred. The events are foreordained and cannot be stopped. But that doesn’t mean you just sit there, a fatalist, and let everyone else make the decisions. God has given His people the ability, nay the privilege, of helping to carry out His sovereign will even in a fallen world.

So yes, I’ll complain about the “instant decision” mindset. But that is because it is not Biblical, not because some people complain about it. As a Christian, my basis should be presenting the whole Gospel, with both truth and grace, not just the parts people like to win human favor. My basis should not be whatever works, or whatever seems better than the “wrong” way of doing it (which could lead to overcorrection).

Now, speaking of overcorrection and trying to follow the Word rather than win friends and influence people, I have a few comments about things I’ve read during the past several days, and I’d like to point out some truths ...

Personally, I find it hard to consider such people to really be Christian, when even I (who know very little about the details) can see that they are doing exactly the opposite of what the Bible says we should do.

And when non-Christians complain about having bad church experiences, Christians often have two equally opposite, and wrong, reactions:

1. Dismiss those issues, either subconsciously or with a trite phrase and/or slogan, such as “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven.”

2. Apologize all over the place for the church and in effect glorify one’s self as a New Improved Enlightened Christian who is trying very hard to be Humble and Not a Hypocrite and thus be loving and caring and meeting people where they are and Missional and Not Your Mama’s Church.

Neither approach is Biblical, and I would argue it won’t work either, at least not if one is hoping to preach the Gospel, with both grace and truth.

So what I would do instead:

3. Acknowledge the church’s faults, but point out that they have resulted from not following the Bible (as you mentioned, Draugrin). The idea is not to impress people, or to be a better example of a better Christian yourself. And the idea should not be to play “good cop/bad cop,” where the church is the bad cop, and you are the good cop. The idea is to glorify Christ, and show how this bad stuff goes on when His way of doing things is forsaken.

After that, redirect a conversation with a non-Christian friend back to more personal matters. Sometimes people legitimately need help understanding badly behaving Christians, and sometimes it’s a smokescreen to cover for one’s own hypocrisy, bad behavior, and rejection of God.

Draugrin, you may notice that what I’m saying is not that we need less quoting of Scripture, but more quoting of Scripture.

Don’t follow a non-Christian’s “rules of the game.” If you believe the Bible is true, why would you? You’ve already said that we know Christians behave badly when they do the opposite of what the Bible says. Now, how will you prove that if you believe you should cite the Bible less in response to a skeptical friend? Exactly how is bad behavior “wrong,” if you don’t present that it’s wrong because God says it is wrong? I’d like to hear a skeptical friend respond to that polite question, because in effect his reasoning goes:

If: “People in the church behave badly and don’t follow the Bible.”
Then: “We really need less of the Bible around here.”

Um ... that is illogical. And it’s not following the primary goal of we as Christians to give glory to God. I keep reading what I would submit is a subconscious assumption on your part, Draugrin, going something like this: Christians ought to try to win the most amount of people in the least amount of time, even if it means using reasoning apart from the Bible to do it. How is such an approach any less pragmatism-based than the ranting cultural-fundie who wants to yell verses at people without thought or context (and doesn’t relate to them personally)? It’s just more of the same — only with the opposite extreme of hiding what you believe in order to make sure people aren’t turned off.

To follow a non-Christian’s “rules of the game” simply because some professing Christians have behaved badly is not honest about what we believe, and not loving toward the person either.

Of course, if we find we ourselves do not believe the Bible and think we need some other reasoning as superior, then the problem is much worse; we would be guilty of presenting, and possibly even believing in ourselves, a false gospel. Unfortunately many professing Christians in their pursuit of being “relevant” or trying to be hipper-than-thou — as opposed to being holier-than-thou — have fallen into this error, and I fear the problem is much worse than simply trying too hard to be liked.

Yes, we can admit Christians have behaved badly, been racist, hateful to women, etc., by not following the Word. Some have not been saved at all — and yes, we can be wary of them and point that out if they do not act like the Christ they claim to follow. But that is not the point.

Condemning them for being flawed and hypocritical simply allows for more hypocrisy going back the other way. We stand over here, condemn them for having failures, and say, Well, I’m glad I’m not like them; I want to be much better than that. The goal then becomes not following the Word, not glorifying God or becoming like Christ, but not being like The Bad Guys. You will overcorrect. You will miss out on a part of the Gospel.

And make no mistake, the truth of the real Gospel is at stake here. I agree that we must be concerned not to let any of our own behaviors (such as narrow-mindedness about other beliefs, etc.) come between someone and the Gospel. But you don’t win points with people ultimately, much less with God, by throwing out the Bible. We must preserve the real Gospel. And yes, it’s a Gospel of hope, but hope from salvation from an eternity in Hell and God’s righteous wrath for personal sin.

To offer merely “hope” for someone’s personal struggles or “felt needs” is like giving a pedicure to a corpse. It’s like trying to remodel a kitchen while the whole house is on fire.

A non-Christian’s main problem is not hurts and struggles. His main problem is sin, and hatred of God. Without God’s grace in our lives through the sacrifice of Christ, we are all like this. We all hate God. We all want to use Him as a means to other ends, whether our own sin or our own “righteousness.” Too many professing Christians are going right along with it, letting non-believers make the “rules of the game” for Christians to follow blithely along. They make God a means to the end of better morality, a happier world, fixing poverty and hunger, and all that. But this is valuing “goodness” more than God. Another word for that: idolatry.

True salvation comes when we see God as the most incredible and amazing Entity in the universe, Who must be desired among all things, Who is holy and loving and righteous and good. At the same time, we must see ourselves for who we really are without Him: not basically decent, or even just hurting people who need help, but rebel sinners who need to die to their own selfish desires and see their own sin as absolutely disgusting in His sight. Only by dying can we truly live.

And yes, there is only one way to do this. It’s very open-minded to say all religions can lead to God, but in what way do they lead to Him, and for what end? Many other religions treat God as a means to some other end, such as morality, rather than Himself.

I suppose if we treat Christianity as this, it makes sense to say, well, why can’t Buddhism be a good path to this as well? But being moral and making a better world is not the goal of Christianity; those are byproducts. The goal is seeking God for Himself and glorifying Him. That is why Jesus died. That is why Christianity is the only way. All other ways focus on man and what he must do and what he wants. It is legalism. Christianity is about God and what He has done and what He wants. This is grace — God saves us, for His own glory, not for ours. Being moral and saving the world results from this, but it’s not the goal. Glorifying God is the goal. He never does anything unless it fits this.

I think we need to be seeing a lot more Scriptures quoted around here for such a vital topic. So far I’ve just been seeing a lot of opinions, and that doesn’t make sense, at least for the Christian posters! With such vital issues as what the Gospel is and how we tell others, our opinion doesn’t matter. Dr Elwin Ransom’s opinion doesn’t matter. Impressing non-Christians doesn’t matter. What matters is what God says.

EDIT a few hours later: And in accordance with my own advice, I'll need to back up everything I said with Scripture too, if anyone doubts its validity!

Don’t follow a non-Christian’s “rules of the game.” If you believe the Bible is true, why would you? You’ve already said that we know Christians behave badly when they do the opposite of what the Bible says. Now, how will you prove that if you believe you should cite the Bible less in response to a skeptical friend? Exactly how is bad behavior “wrong,” if you don’t present that it’s wrong because God says it is wrong? ... True salvation comes when we see God as the most incredible and amazing Entity in the universe, Who must be desired among all things, Who is holy and loving and righteous and good. At the same time, we must see ourselves for who we really are without Him: not basically decent, or even just hurting people who need help, but rebel sinners who need to die to their own selfish desires and see their own sin as absolutely disgusting in His sight. Only by dying can we truly live. ... But being moral and making a better world is not the goal of Christianity; those are byproducts. The goal is seeking God for Himself and glorifying Him. That is why Jesus died. That is why Christianity is the only way. All other ways focus on man and what he must do and what he wants. It is legalism. Christianity is about God and what He has done and what He wants. This is grace — God saves us, for His own glory, not for ours. Being moral and saving the world results from this, but it’s not the goal. Glorifying God is the goal. He never does anything unless it fits this.

Well said. It's all about an external, absolute standard. And there's only one: the Word of God.

I think we need to be seeing a lot more Scriptures quoted around here for such a vital topic. So far I’ve just been seeing a lot of opinions, and that doesn’t make sense, at least for the Christian posters! With such vital issues as what the Gospel is and how we tell others, our opinion doesn’t matter. Dr Elwin Ransom’s opinion doesn’t matter. Impressing non-Christians doesn’t matter. What matters is what God says.

Excellent point. I've been trying!

But 220, if we follow through completely with this Tash/Aslan example, we must remember that Emeth, a devout worshiper of Tash, who rejects Aslan his whole life is granted access to the True Narnia. If we want to relate this to real world religions, that would mean that a true worshiper of Ganesh or Allah or Odin or Whoever could also be granted access to Paradise. . . .Narnia isn't a direct allegory, after all.

1. According to my "Christian themes in the Last Battle" thread, I haven't finished the book yet. I'm holding out on a discussion of Emeth until I do.
2. Check out Pattertwigs Pal's responses in the "Emeth in Aslan's Country" thread. In her last post, I think she addresses just this point. Guess who she compares Emeth to? Paul! Ever since God poured out the Holy Spirit on the 120 in the Upper Room, countless men and women have left false religions to worship Jesus Christ. Countless have been converted. And they still are. This is something you're not taking into consideration. Emeth didn't worship both Tash and Aslan once he looked into Aslan's face. He left false worship for the true.

EDIT
I shared this in "A Place for Praises." And I thought I'd share it with you.

There was a message in tongues yesterday morning at church. And the Spirit said [my memory], "Where is your heart? What do you treasure? Fix your eyes on Me. I have told you I loved you. Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" [Matt 6]. Well, I was dwelling on that word all day.

The emphasis in last night's service was on worship as our whole life response to God: 1. Fruit of lips that confess His name; 2. Doing good and sharing with others. Both are our sacrifices of worship. [See Hebrews 13:15-16.] Near the end of the service, when they sang "You won’t relent,” my heart broke because I knew the source of the lyrics: Song of Solomon, a favorite book. I cried out in repentance [I'd been doing this anyway for a week]. I knew my heart should be wholly Christ's and I knew He should be my treasure. But I also knew He wasn't. And I was broken as a result. But by the time they started singing "How great is our God," especially the lyrics “He wraps Himself in light / And darkness tries to hide / And trembles at His voice,” I was in awe of Jesus. Why? To my mind's eye, Jesus sat beside me and put his arm around me. It felt that way the next 10-15 minutes. I started saying "holy" over and over: the rest of the service, in the car, for the next hour or two at home. "Holy" was almost the only word on my lips.

I know Jesus is real. I know He's alive. I know He loves me. He's holy and righteous and good and faithful and merciful. Jesus didn't reward me according to my sins but according to His great mercy. Jesus is truly my Comforter, my Advocate, my Intercessor. He is holy!

We fix our eyes on what we treasure. And the heart follows the eyes [Job 31:7, Ezekiel 6:8]. So "where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" [Matt 6]. What did David say? "Thy lovingkindness is before mine eyes" [Psalm 26]. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, "the author and finisher of our faith" [Heb 12]!

Give me Jesus
Turn your eyes upon Jesus
No one ever cared for me like Jesus
Only Jesus can satisfy your soul

"The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart, and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit." ~ Psalm 34:18, KJV
"The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." ~ Psalm 51:17, KJV
/EDIT

I just wanted to let everyone know, I haven't been ignoring you, just busy. I am a little too worn out to write a post that makes sense . So I'll pop back as soon as I can.

Briefly on Aslan vs Tash. Aslan, no question ; but remember, that's in the context of Narnia .

GB

I keep reading what I would submit is a subconscious assumption on your part, Draugrin, going something like this: Christians ought to try to win the most amount of people in the least amount of time, even if it means using reasoning apart from the Bible to do it. How is such an approach any less pragmatism-based than the ranting cultural-fundie who wants to yell verses at people without thought or context (and doesn’t relate to them personally)?

This is exactly what I think we need less of. I'm not saying don't cite the Bible or don't quote it at all or don't base your discussion on it...those things are all necessary.

My point is that if a Christian and a non-Christian are having this discussion, and all the Christian does is quote Bible verses verbatim as a means of answering all the non-Christian's questions, not much progress will be made. By all means, quote the Bible as part of the answer, but understand that the quote itself won't be enough. The quote needs explaining, the concept needs to be related to something personal because the non-Christian doesn't have that point of reference that comes from studying the Bible. All they have is personal experience, so the two need to be connected.
Christians and non-Christians often have very different worldviews. What makes inherent sense to a Christian could seem totally nuts to a non-Christian and vice versa, and I think this is what can cause a huge communication block. What seems like the obvious meaning of a Bible quote that is very powerful to a Christian might be totally confusing and frustrating to a non-Christian, and when the Christian presents this quote with an air of "Do you see now? This is so meaningful!", the non-Christian will be sitting there going "What? How did you...what?"

My ultimate point here is that Bible quotes need explaining when they're used to make points to non-Christians in terms that non-Christians will understand. That doesn't mean the explanation can't be based on Biblical truths, it just needs to be phrased in a more palatable way.

Draugin: I liked everything you said in your previous post, all except "in a more palatable way." The things of God will never be palatable to non-Christians, no matter how they're introduced or phrased. I know this from personal experience. In The Last Battle, how did Aslan's wonderful "pies and tongues and pigeons and trifles and ices and ... wine” taste to the unbelieving Dwarfs? They think they’re eating and drinking “hay ... an old turnip ... a raw cabbage leaf,” and “dirty water out of a trough that a donkey’s been at!" [138-39]

What's the secret? How does God become palatable to a non-Christian? He or she must see [through spiritual eyes God has opened and which only He can open] that the way they're headed isn't leading them anywhere, i.e. that they're lost. Only then will they be interested in the gospel. Telling someone they're lost in sin when they don't think/feel/know that they are is pointless. Christ isn't palatable or desirable to people who don't see their need of Him. They must first see their need for Christ. And this frequently happens through various experiences on the part of the unbeliever, and prayer on the part of the believer.

EDIT
What did Jesus say? "They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice': for I am not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance." ~ Matt 9:12-13. God has to wake us up to our true spiritual state, to being lost and dead in sin, and many times He does this through personal tragedy. And by tragedy I don't necessarily mean death. Jesus is the "Friend of a wounded heart." But what does that imply? We must be wounded. And only Jesus can heal those wounds. This isn't true for everybody, of course. I've known children to get saved at age 5. But teenagers and adults are more likely to know life's wounds.

Wayne Watson, "Friend of a wounded heart"
♫ Smile, make them think you're happy
Lie, and say that things are fine.
And hide that empty longing that you feel, don't ever show it,
Just keep your heart concealed.
Why are the days so lonely?
I wonder where, where can a heart go free?
And who will dry the tears that no one sees?
There must be someone to share your silent dreams.
Caught like a leaf in the wind
Looking for a friend, where can you turn?
Whisper the words of a prayer
And you'll find Him there, arms open wide, love in His eyes.

CHORUS:
Jesus, He meets you where you are.
Oh, Jesus, He heals your secret scars
All the love you're longing for is Jesus
The friend of a wounded heart.

Joy, comes like the the morning
Hope, deepens as you grow
and peace, beyond the reaches of your soul,
Comes blowing through you,
for love has made you whole.
Once like a leaf in the wind
Looking for a friend, where could you turn?
You spoke the words of a prayer
And you found Him there, arms open wide, love in His eyes ♫
/EDIT

Btw, I posted a little more on Emeth in the "Emeth in Aslan's Country" thread.

Though I’m not with 220 on issues like the content and Biblical context of true spiritual gifts, I am solidly with you, 220, on this:

Draugin: I liked everything you said in your previous post, all except “in a more palatable way.” The things of God will never be palatable to non-Christians, no matter how they’re introduced or phrased. I know this from personal experience.

Amen, and so do I, yet I “have something more sure, the prophetic word”:

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (ESV)

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

2 Corinthians 4: 3-4 (ESV)

This next comes from John’s gospel, who is even more clear about the fact that (strangely) it is God Who is often directly responsible for preventing people from truly hearing the truth. Yet they themselves are still held to account for their sin of unbelief:

Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.”

When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

“Lord, who has believed what he heard from us,
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,

“He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their heart,
lest they see with their eyes,
and understand with their heart, and turn,
and I would heal them.”

Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God.

John 12: 35-43 (ESV)

By the way, don’t fall — as I often do, when reading books or columns about the Bible — for the phenomenon of “Bible Fog,” and skip over these verses! It’s so tempting, but no, I should be offering no reasoning here that is not solidly based on and pointing to these passages. Read them carefully.

Telling someone they’re lost in sin when they don’t think/feel/know that they are is pointless.

I don’t know about that. You never know when God will bring an echo from the past — “You’ve sinned against a holy and loving God, Who if He must remain holy must punish you with His wrath” — back into a rebel’s life, at a time when he/she might feel it. I hope you’re not going “hyper-Calvinist” on me, 220; surely not!

If we waited until some kind of evidence that a person would “think/feel/know that” he/she is a sinner, I don't know if we’d ever get any out-loud, direct witnessing done.

I don’t know whom God will choose to save; my responsibility, and even better my joy — because I get to be a part of His plan — is to preach the Gospel anyway. I don’t know who the elect are, but He does. This is like time-travel: if I were to go back in time, the events have already happened and are preordained, but something I do just might make them come to pass anyway. So it is with God’s sovereignty and our decisions.

Christ isn’t palatable or desirable to people who don’t see their need of Him. They must first see their need for Christ. And this frequently happens through various experiences on the part of the unbeliever, and prayer on the part of the believer.

I would only add this: that it is the divine work of the Holy Spirit to remove a heart of stone and give someone a heart of flesh. He alone can raise someone from what Paul calls spiritual death (Ephesians 1-2). He can do this with or without a series of previous experiences or a believer’s prayer, yet more often than not I, too, have seen these happening first.

Draugrin, along with 220 I think I know where you’re coming from — and I’m basing some of this on what I believe I remember from previous discussions with you. We seem to be approaching the same Biblical result, but from different perspectives. So I would encourage you to keep that goal in mind, because I think it’s a good one, but not for the reason that “it will work better,” but because “it’s Biblical and therefore the right and God-sponsored way of doing things.”

Make sure the goal isn’t very similar to the “instant-decision” types of people, that is, the goal of doing anything, anything — including making the Gospel somehow “more palatable” to Save a Soul.

I don’t believe you have the wrong goal in mind, though I keep hearing some quasi-Biblical motivations. But quasi-Biblical motivations can and do lead to the wrong goals as well. (I could cite a few specific names here as test cases: “emergent”/liberal leaders Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt.)

Perhaps I’m beginning to see more of where you’re coming from. In the past, because of your background (correct me if I’m wrong) you’ve seen a lot of attempts to quote chapter and verse at people, as if that’s all that’s necessary to make them see. Maybe you’ve heard God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life preached at non-Christians, and it hasn’t worked because, as you said:

Christians and non-Christians often have very different worldviews. What makes inherent sense to a Christian could seem totally nuts to a non-Christian and vice versa, and I think this is what can cause a huge communication block. What seems like the obvious meaning of a Bible quote that is very powerful to a Christian might be totally confusing and frustrating to a non-Christian, and when the Christian presents this quote with an air of “Do you see now? This is so meaningful!”, the non-Christian will be sitting there going “What? How did you...what?”

Here’s something that shocks some Christians (but I don’t say or do it only to be shocking): Lord willing, I will never, ever say “God loves you” to a nonbeliever, or talk about all the “meaningful” parts of the Bible that have blessed me so, and all of that. This is something Christians should only say to other Christians. For a non-believer, who is outside of Grace, of course they’re not going to get it, either in thought or in feeling. What they need to hear instead is the parts of the Bible addressed to them: that they are sinners, outside of the love of a holy God, and rightfully so. Without the covering of Christ’s blood, shed for sinners on the cross, they will not only fail to have a Best Life Now; they will suffer God’s wrath forever, and rightfully so, because He is not only perfect love, but perfect righteousness and cannot merely tolerate rebel sinners in His presence.

Too many Christians want to skip to the good news without talking about the bad news. They are not only dishonest about the “bad news,” but they confuse non-Christians like crazy.

For non-Christians: Law first, because right now they are under God’s loving and just condemnation. Then Grace. Don’t skip Law to get to the grace. They won’t get it, and there’s much less of a chance they’ll even care about Who Jesus is and how meaningful the Bible is.

Jesus lamented that the religious leaders of his day were like children playing the funeral game and the marriage game, but they could neither mourn over their sins when John the Baptist came, nor dance in celebration at the arrival of the Son of Man (Matt. 11:16-19). Similarly today, the preaching of the law in all of its gripping judgment and the preaching of the gospel in all of its surprising sweetness merge into a confused message of gentle exhortation to a more fulfilling life. Consequently, we know neither how to mourn nor how to throw a real party. The bad news no longer stands in sharp contrast with the good news; we become content with so-so news that eventually fails to bring genuine conviction or genuine comfort but keeps us on the treadmill of anxiety, craving the rest revival, technique, or movement to lift our spirits and catapult us to heavenly glory.

A final note: failing to explain the tougher parts of the Bible, and God’s nature — He is not just love, sweet love; He is also rightfully righteous — will lead to professing Christians “falling away” from the faith. Their reason: when they take a harder look at the harder, God’s-wrath parts of Scripture, they just can’t make it fit with this saccharine-sweet version of Christianity.

This morning I was reminded of this when someone sent me the text of someone’s note on Facebook. After claiming to be a Christian, apparently for a while, this someone then decided he/she was now an Atheist.

Very calmly this person explained how he arrived at this conclusion, and asked people not to try converting him back to Christianity.

Upon my recent reflections on the Bible, the horrors justified in the name of God in the Old Testament cannot be ignored. Before any of you say, “I am ignorant of the Bible”, I will propose to you that I am not. Although I do not have an in depth knowledge of theology, I have read the entire Bible enough times to know about its content. And this content is mostly, well horrifying.

Though I don’t know this person, or why he decided to reject Christianity, I can take a guess at one reason. Skipping over the question of whether this person was ever truly a Christian anyway (hint: 1 John 2: 18-19), I think it’s clear this person never received good, Biblical answers about why a supposedly all-love-all-the-time God would command the Israelites to kill all kinds of people in His name. Very likely this person only heard the lovey-dovey stuff about God, and rarely (if ever) the “tougher” parts about how God is perfectly holy. Yes, He does send people to Hell — because He cannot tolerate sin — and yes, He has in the past commanded His people to do bloody things like this, because under that covenant they would have been corrupted by disgusting neighbors.

This is the simplified version of why God is righteous, and why the Bible is full of “horrifying” content. It illustrates the seriousness of sin — something that is sorely lacking within many churches, and in many evangelism presentations.

That’s why I’ll never tell a nonbeliever “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.” I may not even say “God loves you.” If pressed, I would say, “God might love you; I certainly hope so!” (though I’d prefer not to say this, because it sounds presumptuous). But I would keep the conversation focused on the Law.

”Do you want to love God? Do you see Him as the most incredible Entity to be desired? Do you want to get rid of your sin that is disgusting in His sight, and even the false security of your ‘righteousness,’ in order to get to Him? If you desire this, then I believe God may be drawing you to Him. Repent of your sin and trust in Him alone, through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, and embrace Him as your Savior and Lord. Only be doing this will He be forever meaningful to you. Only by doing this can you live eternal life, not just with happiness for yourself, but happiness and growing delight in Him, the only treasure that will reward you forever.”

Does this person know how loving and holy God is?

Does he/she understand that there’s no way his/her good deeds could outweigh the bad?

Does this person understand that Jesus didn’t just come to Earth to make things nicer and more moral, but to start building His Kingdom and die for the sins of His people? Does this person understand that there will be people outside this Kingdom — including anyone guilty of sexual immorality, thievery, drunkenness, greed and much more (1 Corinthians 6: 9-10)? Does this person know that all people are like this by nature?

If such a person doesn’t get any of this, I won’t be going back to the Bible for more and more verses to try to persuade him or her, or talk about how “meaningful” it all is. Of course it will have no meaning for an unregenerate heart. Such a person must see their own sin and repent first.

Thus the message is not: accept Jesus to be saved. “Accept Jesus” is not in the Bible. Rather, Jesus must accept you, for you to be saved. Repent and believe. Only this is the Gospel. Only this can save.

If someone doesn’t understand this and follow its admonishment, he/she will not only fail to “get” Christianity, but will fail to get saved. And perhaps even worse, many kinds of people who once believed they were Christians — such as the unfortunate Facebook person I quoted earlier — will prove to be false converts, because they never truly knew God and knew themselves as sinners who needed to repent and be born again.

New birth must come first, a new birth brought about by the Spirit, Who is portrayed here as almost randomly blowing about. A person cannot make himself be born. God must do that work first, to regenerate and resurrect a spiritually dead person (Ephesians 1-2). Yet praise God that very often He will use the audible or even silent testimony of one of us!

Jesus answered [Nicodemus], “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Perhaps I’m beginning to see more of where you’re coming from. In the past, because of your background (correct me if I’m wrong) you’ve seen a lot of attempts to quote chapter and verse at people, as if that’s all that’s necessary to make them see. Maybe you’ve heard God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life preached at non-Christians, and it hasn’t worked

Actually, most of what I've seen and experienced has been more along the lines of "God hates you and you will burn in hellfire! Repent! Confess! Repent! Here, quick take this copy of the New Testament! No? Fine, I'll just throw it at you!"

(The throwing sounds ridiculous, but it actually happened my freshman year )

This tends to just make people angry and defensive. I've often heard people say that their biggest stumbling block to becoming Christian is other Christians. With situations like that, there's an actually very painful attempt to try to reconcile between an honest sense of need to convert and revulsion at becoming part of what they see as something so hateful. It's a very difficult paradox.

Speaking of which, I noticed there were some older gentlemen on campus today (from the same group of the New Testament throwing, actually) standing at strategic points and asking passing students if they would like "a copy of God's Word". Most of the reaction that I heard from students around me was along the lines of "Nah, whatever. I'm going to Hell anyway". It just made me think about what we'd been discussing here, and whether or not handing out mini-NT's is helpful or hindering.

A final note: failing to explain the tougher parts of the Bible, and God’s nature — He is not just love, sweet love; He is also rightfully righteous — will lead to professing Christians “falling away” from the faith. Their reason: when they take a harder look at the harder, God’s-wrath parts of Scripture, they just can’t make it fit with this saccharine-sweet version of Christianity.

This is something I've only started thinking about recently because of this thread. (Thanks guys! ) There really has been an over-emphasis on the niceness of God, and I think that has just as much potential to push people away from Christianity. I walked past a church booth at the fair with a non-Christian friend of mine once, and he said "This is my problem with them...God just isn't that nice!". I agree with Dr. Ransom on this...the extreme lovey-dovey approach doesn't work either. An over-emphasis in either way doesn't work...maybe we need something like Christianity MythBusters.

Actually, most of what I've seen and experienced has been more along the lines of "God hates you and you will burn in hellfire! Repent! Confess! Repent! Here, quick take this copy of the New Testament! No? Fine, I'll just throw it at you!" (The throwing sounds ridiculous, but it actually happened my freshman year )

You're right. That sounds pretty bad. 1. They don't really explain the gospel, i.e. what you have to repent of [sin] and why [hell] + Jesus paid the penalty of sin in your place since you can't. 2. "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son..." [John 3]. That doesn't sound like hate to me.

There really has been an over-emphasis on the niceness of God, and I think that has just as much potential to push people away from Christianity. I walked past a church booth at the fair with a non-Christian friend of mine once, and he said "This is my problem with them...God just isn't that nice!". I agree with Dr. Ransom on this...the extreme lovey-dovey approach doesn't work either.

Yes, over-emphasis, love without judgment isn't justice. I "heard" someone say once [book? magazine? online?] that true Christianity and true repentance begins in fear.

I'll talk more later. Gotta run!

Condemning them for being flawed and hypocritical simply allows for more hypocrisy going back the other way. We stand over here, condemn them for having failures, and say, Well, I’m glad I’m not like them; I want to be much better than that. The goal then becomes not following the Word, not glorifying God or becoming like Christ, but not being like The Bad Guys. You will overcorrect. You will miss out on a part of the Gospel.

I’m not sure I’m quite understanding what you are saying. I could see myself saying something about all Christians being “flawed and hypocritical.” Would that be wrong? I’m perfectly willing to admit that I am not perfect and I know of know of no one who is.

And yes, there is only one way to do this. It’s very open-minded to say all religions can lead to God, but in what way do they lead to Him, and for what end? Many other religions treat God as a means to some other end, such as morality, rather than Himself.

I suppose if we treat Christianity as this, it makes sense to say, well, why can’t Buddhism be a good path to this as well? But being moral and making a better world is not the goal of Christianity; those are byproducts. The goal is seeking God for Himself and glorifying Him. That is why Jesus died. That is why Christianity is the only way. All other ways focus on man and what he must do and what he wants. It is legalism. Christianity is about God and what He has done and what He wants. This is grace — God saves us, for His own glory, not for ours. Being moral and saving the world results from this, but it’s not the goal. Glorifying God is the goal. He never does anything unless it fits this.

I said something like this at my Bible Study last week. However, you say it a lot better. I had the individual (legalism) part of other religions.

Christians and non-Christians often have very different worldviews. What makes inherent sense to a Christian could seem totally nuts to a non-Christian and vice versa, and I think this is what can cause a huge communication block. What seems like the obvious meaning of a Bible quote that is very powerful to a Christian might be totally confusing and frustrating to a non-Christian, and when the Christian presents this quote with an air of "Do you see now? This is so meaningful!", the non-Christian will be sitting there going "What? How did you...what?"

Excellent point. I came across the following passage from 1 Cor. It supports the idea of a communication block, as well as my scenario from here I also thought about people who debate against Christianity and / or rely on their own mind when I read it. I bolded the parts that I found especially interesting or relevant.

18For the story and message of the cross is sheer absurdity and folly to those who are perishing and on their way to perdition, but to us who are being saved it is the [manifestation of] the power of God. 19For it is written, I will baffle and render useless and destroy the learning of the learned and the philosophy of the philosophers and the cleverness of the clever and the discernment of the discerning; I will frustrate and nullify [them] and bring [them] to nothing. 20Where is the wise man (the philosopher)? Where is the scribe (the scholar)? Where is the investigator (the logician, the debater) of this present time and age? Has not God shown up the nonsense and the folly of this world's wisdom? 21For when the world with all its earthly wisdom failed to perceive and recognize and know God by means of its own philosophy, God in His wisdom was pleased through the foolishness of preaching [salvation, procured by Christ and to be had through Him], to save those who believed (who clung to and trusted in and relied on Him). 22For while Jews [demandingly] ask for signs and miracles and Greeks pursue philosophy and wisdom, 23We preach Christ (the Messiah) crucified, [preaching which] to the Jews is a scandal and an offensive stumbling block [that springs a snare or trap], and to the Gentiles it is absurd and utterly unphilosophical nonsense. 24But to those who are called, whether Jew or Greek (Gentile), Christ [is] the Power of God and the Wisdom of God. 25[This is] because the foolish thing [that has its source in] God is wiser than men, and the weak thing [that springs] from God is stronger than men. 26For [simply] consider your own call, brethren; not many [of you were considered to be] wise according to human estimates and standards, not many influential and powerful, not many of high and noble birth. 27[No] for God selected (deliberately chose) what in the world is foolish to put the wise to shame, and what the world calls weak to put the strong to shame. 28And God also selected (deliberately chose) what in the world is lowborn and insignificant and branded and treated with contempt, even the things that are nothing, that He might depose and bring to nothing the things that are, 29So that no mortal man should [have pretense for glorying and] boast in the presence of God. 30But it is from Him that you have your life in Christ Jesus, Whom God made our Wisdom from God, [revealed to us a knowledge of the divine plan of salvation previously hidden, manifesting itself as] our Righteousness [thus making us upright and putting us in right standing with God], and our Consecration [making us pure and holy], and our Redemption [providing our ransom from eternal penalty for sin]. 31So then, as it is written, Let him who boasts and proudly rejoices and glories, boast and proudly rejoice and glory in the Lord. AMP

Dr. Ransom: Thanks for the verses. I quoted some of them before, to GB.

Telling someone they’re lost in sin when they don’t think/feel/know that they are is pointless.

I don’t know about that. You never know when God will bring an echo from the past — “You’ve sinned against a holy and loving God, Who if He must remain holy must punish you with His wrath” — back into a rebel’s life, at a time when he/she might feel it. I hope you’re not going “hyper-Calvinist” on me, 220; surely not! If we waited until some kind of evidence that a person would “think/feel/know that” he/she is a sinner, I don't know if we’d ever get any out-loud, direct witnessing done. I don’t know whom God will choose to save; my responsibility, and even better my joy — because I get to be a part of His plan — is to preach the Gospel anyway.

Aargh! How could I be so dumb?! I wasn't thinking clearly. Of course it's our job to witness, to sow the seed of the Word! And I said earlier I wasn't responsible for the results. God is. Yes, we need to tell people they're lost in sin. This is step 1 of the gospel. But whether or not they understand is up to God. If they do, then step 2! Jesus! You know what occurred to me this morning? That not telling people about Jesus is like spiritual murder. We're consenting to their death warrants.

I would only add this: that it is the divine work of the Holy Spirit to remove a heart of stone and give someone a heart of flesh. He alone can raise someone from what Paul calls spiritual death (Ephesians 1-2). He can do this with or without a series of previous experiences or a believer’s prayer, yet more often than not I, too, have seen these happening first.

I've learned that praying for the Holy Spirit to open eyes and ears, and soften hearts, prepares the soil of a person's heart to receive the seed.

I think it’s clear this person never received good, Biblical answers about why a supposedly all-love-all-the-time God would command the Israelites to kill all kinds of people in His name. Very likely this person only heard the lovey-dovey stuff about God, and rarely (if ever) the “tougher” parts about how God is perfectly holy. Yes, He does send people to Hell — because He cannot tolerate sin — and yes, He has in the past commanded His people to do bloody things like this, because under that covenant they would have been corrupted by disgusting neighbors. This is the simplified version of why God is righteous, and why the Bible is full of “horrifying” content. It illustrates the seriousness of sin — something that is sorely lacking within many churches, and in many evangelism presentations.

I've tried to explain what's in bold to others, but they didn't get it. It's all about holiness. God was basically saying, "Don't let your disgusting neighbors live. If you do, you'll end up like them. Why? Your sinful nature. Don't be corrupted by unbelievers. Be holy like Me." Of course, in Judges 2-3, God let the disgusting neighbors become a thorn in Israel's side, since they didn't do their job and rid the land of evil, in order to test the nation's obedience.

If such a person doesn’t get any of this, I won’t be going back to the Bible for more and more verses to try to persuade him or her, or talk about how “meaningful” it all is. Of course it will have no meaning for an unregenerate heart. Such a person must see their own sin and repent first.

Exactly. And this is what we pray for: that the Spirit will draw people to Himself and open their eyes so they'll see their own sin and repent.

Curious: why do some of you think I'm a free-willie? I'm not. But I'm not wholly Calvinist either. To me it's like law AND grace, justice AND mercy. Each element in both pairs is necessary for a whole gospel. "Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other" [Psalm 85]. How? Through the cross! Below are my brief thoughts on predestination/free will.