Posted on 09/30/2016 11:36:30 AM PDT by Gamecock
New Zealand-born evangelist Ray Comfort, who's best known for his street evangelism in which he asks people about God, the Bible, sin and salvation, explains why he never leads people in the "sinner's prayer."
In Comfort's many taped evangelism videos he is rarely seen praying with those he encounters and has received many questions from believers who are curious about this particular omission.
One commenter posed the question to Comfort on Facebook last Friday: "You often have them at the point of belief but then don't allow them, or encourage them, to confess. You do great work to get them to believe, and yet not confess. If you don't want to lead them in a prayer, which is what people do when they exchange vows at a wedding, why not encourage them to pray their own prayer? Help them if they need it, but why not?
Comfort responded with a video message to provide insight as to why he doesn't lead people in the "sinner's prayer."
"I regularly pray with people off camera. But I think you are talking about leading people is what is often called a 'sinner's prayer.' It's similar to the difference between a 'shotgun' wedding, and one where the bride and groom make vows because they want to. Many who make decisions for Christ nowadays are shotgun weddings. They are manipulated by man rather than born of God, and it has filled our churches with false converts," he said.
Comfort also used the example of a husband and wife who are at odds. He explained that leading someone in the "sinner's prayer" is similar to him walking up to the house of the fighting couple with the husband, then ringing the bell and telling the wife that her husband was terribly sorry and then proceeding to lead the husband in an apology to his wife.
The California-based minister pointed to the fact that the apology would not be sincere or genuine since it's not coming directly from the heart of the husband. He likened that scenario to the way one should pray and repent of their sins on their own to God and not be led by someone else.
Comfort's evangelism videos can be seen on YouTube. His work also includes the miniseries "The Way of the Master" and films "180: Changing the Heart of a Nation," and "Noah and the Last Days."
His last film, "Audacity" took on the subject of homosexuality and Christianity, and seeks to answer the question of whether or not Christians should share the truth of the Bible with the LGBT community even if it's frowned upon.
Oh?
News to me.
You’ve chosen to ignore them.
No; I choose not to go beyond what's been written.
And yet, you hold your position to be conclusive.
My position is that Scripture does NOT do the defining; man is doing it.
Without being able to answer the many questions raised by these passages, your position is speculative.
I speculate nothing. I refuse to snatch a verse from here; one from there and another from a third location to try to create a Calvinosaurus creature.
If you are unpersuaded by the evidence I have presented, fine. It won’t keep you out of Heaven if you’re wrong, nor ensure the salvation of those who do accept it. It’s not the Gospel. It is not essential to salvation or living the Christian life.
Now we are in 100% agreement! Without being able to answer the many questions raised by these passages, your position is speculative.
“News to me.”
What is news to you, that the giants were “men of renown” or that your proposed explanation of Genesis 6 does not account for this?
Either way, you have offered no answer to this or the other seven issues which, as I pointed out, your position does not account for.
“I choose not to go beyond what’s been written.”
Your position goes far beyond what is written. Nothing in the passage itself defines the term “sons of God”. You seem incredibly hostile to a well-reasoned and entirely Biblical argument because you favor an unsubstantiated and incomplete proposition.
“My position is that Scripture does NOT do the defining; man is doing it.”
I can’t even begin to guess what you mean.
“I speculate nothing. I refuse to snatch a verse from here; one from there and another from a third location to try to create a Calvinosaurus creature.”
Yes you are speculating. Completely. Sorry, but that is exactly what you are doing. There are only three options: you admit you don’t know what the passage means, you speculate (like you have) about it, or you form a solid conclusion based on the evidence. You do not admit to not knowing. And though you may be 100% convinced of your speculation, it is still speculation.
You inserted this odd rambling which appears to have something to do with Calvinism. I’m completely baffled as to where that came from. And then you claim a superior way of handling scripture because of NOT using scripture. You are implicitly accusing me of improperly handling God’s word, in contrast with your superior approach, for my supposedly “snatching” verses from one place or another.
Rather than appreciating the fact that I have brought substantive Biblical support for all of the elements of my proposition, you treat this with contempt. I am getting a strong sense that your contempt may not really be directed at me since you seem to have little use for hearing from the word of God about the word of God.
When apostles and even Christ Himself comment on this exact passage (Genesis 6-10), I cannot fathom a Bible-believer calling the use of such scriptures to shed light on the meaning of this passage as being “snatched” out of context.
“Without being able to answer the many questions raised by these passages, your position is speculative.”
Do you just like to argue for the sake of arguing? You haven’t answered a single one of the eight objections I presented. What “many questions raised”? You presented one, which I answered. And now you are simply throwing back in my face my description of your position.
“Speculative” does not mean it is wrong. It is not a sin to speculate. Inquiry is a starting point. But apparently you took it as an insult because your proposed explanation of the passage is not accompanied by the evidence needed to support it.
If you want to believe your position based on your respect for a commentator, or a preacher you’ve heard, or just a gut feeling, fine. Just don’t get offended that other people are unconvinced. And certainly don’t start lashing out at someone for actually daring to consult... oh, I don’t know... maybe the Bible.
Like I already made perfectly clear, I do not care if you do not agree. That’s your prerogative. The meaning of “sons of God” in Genesis 6 is not particularly germane to the overall issue of studying the Bible. However, your insistence on trying to argue against my view without presenting any evidence to the contrary, while insisting that your view is superior (though completely unsubstantiated) is far more troubling than what you believe “sons of God” in Genesis 6 refers to. Your belief on this issue is trivial. Your approach to arguing the meaning of scripture and attacks against my reliance on scripture to build my case is truly troubling.
Calvinosaurus is from Calvin & Hobbes
Oh. Thanks for filling me in. Never would have guessed. Seemed like such a made up word I didn’t even consider Googling it.
I’m an old C&H fan ... got the books, too.
Eph 5:31-32 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.We are created in Adam and we are created in Christ. Note that the spiritual man is created unto good works. You say he isn’t free to give us a human spirit until we confess our sins. Does this apply to Adam? Does Adam obtain salvation the same way we do? How can Adam be spiritually dead before he is born again? To be dead implies that something was once alive. Spiritual birth is the second birth.
I Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.Sin is in the flesh not in the spirit. It is the spiritual man that never dies.
John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
>Likewise; I'm sure.
I miss Hobb’s comebacks to Calvin!
“Likewise; I’m sure.”
Obviously what I said applies to me as well. There’s no need to say it. If you just feel an uncontrollable need to have the last word, I suggest let it have substance.
I have seen many of your posts on this forum. Most of them are well-stated and helpful. Often it appears you put forth some effort to make them substantive also.
But on this thread, it feels as if Elsie went on vacation and Elsie’s immature teenage child decided to log into the FR account.
You chimed in to make quick comments, belittled the use of the word of God, and offered no meaningful response to numerous issues brought up. You’re sounding more like the mockers Proverbs warns about than a fellow believer that I am convinced you are. Your comments have been derisive and terse.
Why bother engaging in conversation at all when it amounts to posting one-sided diatribes that do not reflect a comprehension of the subject being addressed, attention to the comments to which you are responding, or enough appreciation of the subject matter to actually give it more than a passing thought?
Your responses here have been lazy and condescending, and therefore offensive. And forgive me for being so direct, but I know you are capable of better. I am not trying to provoke you to anger or embarrass you on a public forum. Instead, I would like to provoke you to live up to your usual helpful contributions here. I am certain I could learn from your knowledge and experience if you bother to use them.
Ooooooh; I am wounded...
Offense is in the eye of the beholder.
Again, you respond to a well-thought out response by glossing over it, mocking it, and apparently not even bothering to read it.
Even if you do not respect me or my opinion, you should have shown reverence for the word of God. Instead you chose to mock, over and over.
Here is how those who have a proper fear of God respond to hearing the Bible. They respond with reverence:
Nehemiah 8:5
And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up.
The Bible describes your behavior as being a “mocker” (aka scorner, or scoffer). It particularly identifies mockers as those who mock the spiritual truths of the Bible.
Mockers do not listen to verbal correction:
Proverbs 13:1b
A scoffer does not listen to rebuke.
A mocker tries to learn but fails:
Proverbs 14:6a
A scoffer seeks wisdom and does not find it.
Mockers do not fear God:
Proverbs 15:31-33
The ear that hears the rebukes of life
Will abide among the wise.
He who disdains instruction despises his own soul,
But he who heeds rebuke gets understanding.
The fear of the Lord is the instruction of wisdom,
And before honor is humility.
A mocker despises wisdom and instruction:
Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.
God punishes mockers for the benefit of others who might follow in their paths:
Proverbs 21:11
When the scoffer is punished, the simple is made wise;
But when the wise is instructed, he receives knowledge.
Mockers answer without thinking. They don’t bother to listen. They just want to argue. This brings destruction on their lives:
Proverbs 18:12-13
Before destruction the heart of a man is haughty,
And before honor is humility.
He who answers a matter before he hears it,
It is folly and shame to him.
Mockers do not help anyone learn. They just start fights:
Proverbs 22:10
Cast out the scoffer, and contention will leave;
Yes, strife and reproach will cease.
The heart of the problem with mockers is that they are very proud:
Proverbs 21:24
A proud and haughty man— “Scoffer” is his name;
He acts with arrogant pride.
Ironically, BOTH of the New Testament authors who I cited about the very subject of Noah, fallen angels, and giants, warn about people in the last days behaving like you have:
Jude 10
But these speak evil of whatever they do not know.
2 Peter 2:12
But these... speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption.
It is quite sad when a professing follower of Christ remains stubbornly arrogant and unrepentant when confronted with Biblical truth. But the Bible says this will happen in these last days:
Jude 18a
how they [the apostles] told you that there would be mockers in the last time
1 Timothy 4:1a
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith
2 Peter 3:3a
knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days
It truly makes me sad that a professing Christian would risk bringing reproach on Christ as well as severe judgment on himself unnecessarily in order to cling to pride.
I have a feeling, that those who are suffering untold agony in the lake of fire, would gladly will themselves out of existence, to escape the fires of Hell, but it ain't happening bro. They will be there for all eternity. What a horrible thought. No annihilation, not now, not ever.
I am curious whether those who reject this proposition — that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 are fallen angels — have any doubt about whether the serpent in Genesis 3 is the Devil.
God said the “Seed of the woman” would crush the head of the serpent, and that there would be enmity between this “Seed” and the “seed” of the serpent.
Keep in mind that in both cases “seed” is singular. If Jesus is the Seed of the woman, who is the seed of the serpent?
Your remote analysis of my state of mind from your point of view just keeps getting better and better.
My post was mostly just the Bible.
You have not shown the slightest deference or respect to the word of God in this thread.
You keep confirming what the Bible says about you based on your words, not my supposed mind reading as you falsely claim.
Matthew 12:37
For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.
Believers are ‘the body of Christ’, ‘the bride of Christ’ ... these are singular as well.
I am not positive bro. I don't want to go beyond what is written, so all I can do is give my opinion. I think the woman is Israel. The seed of the woman, is Jesus. I always thought the seed of the serpent was Satan, but I am not sure.
Here is the thing, however. When the serpent started talking to Eve, didn't she and Adam think it was odd that an animal was talking to them? Was it normal at that time, that animals communicated with them? I would have thought Adam and Eve would have recoiled in horror that an animal was talking to them, and ran away, but Eve talked right back to it. Am I the only one who thinks it is weird to have an animal talk to them? I know my dog tries to talk to me, but I can't understand her. She just looks at me and barks. 🐶
As far as Genesis 6 is concerned, do I think fallen angels can have sexual desire for women? Yes, I do. Just what they are able to do about it, I am not sure. One thing I AM sure of, is that something UTTERLY dreadful was going on back then. So dreadful that God destroyed the earth 🌏 There has always been evil going on, and I think there have always been people willing to do Satan's bidding, but for God to destroy the earth, without going beyond what is written, I can only guess, that whatever it was that was going on, must have been REALLY bad. I believe the Flood was the worst disaster to ever hit the earth.
“Believers are ‘the body of Christ’, ‘the bride of Christ’ ... these are singular as well.”
Very true. In fact, believers (plural) are collectively in Christ, the promised Seed (singular).
Galatians 3:29
And if you [plural in the Greek] are Christ’s, then you [again, plural] are Abraham’s seed [singular], and heirs according to the promise.
1 Corinthians 12:12
For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ.
Yet Paul does argue that the use of Seed in the singular (when God promised Abraham that all the world would be blessed through his Seed) means that this prophecy is about Christ. When the same exact word (i.e. seed) is used to describe Abraham’s descendants in the plural, how can Paul accurately and under divine inspiration claim the singularity of this word indicates it speaks of Christ?
Three reasons:
1) He is pointing out who the promise is “to” not who the promise is “about” in this particular text. That is, God promised Abraham to give the land and bless the world through his seed. It is not that God could not fulfill this through many Israelites. It is that He is obligated to fulfill this to at least two people. One is Abraham. The other is Christ. The promise is about the many who are part of this promised seed, as we see later in the same chapter.
2) He is pointing out that not all of Abraham’s descendants are part of the promised Seed. He again quotes the passage in which God will call His promised Seed through Isaac and not Ishmael. This is important. Many descendants are excluded.
3) He is pointing out that many are accounted for the seed who are NOT descendants of Abraham. This would include most Gentile believers. (Arab and some other ethnicities are Gentile descendants of Abraham.)
It is a commonly held belief (in fact I do not know of anyone who claims otherwise) that the Seed of the Woman in Genesis 3 refers to Christ.
By this token, is there any reason to believe that the seed of the serpent is not culminated in the coming anti-Christ?
And more significantly, if there is a cosmic conflict between the two seeds of Genesis 3, isn’t it reasonable to believe that the reason for the destruction of the whole world in Genesis 6 is about more than believers marrying unbelievers? Isn’t it reasonable to believe that Satan has been attempting to destroy or cut off the godly Seed by killing off the bloodline, or even attempting to kill the Christ Child through demonically inspired human powers?
Hold this thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.