The Gospel and Words
Posted byRush Limbaugh has a saying: “Words mean things.” With this in mind I want you to examine something for me and give me your feedback on it.
When sharing the gospel with someone I always ask permission to do so. It would be rude and very inconsiderate for me to just launch into the gospel without asking permission. I like to request permission and, after an initial question, to proceed to a Gospel presentation by making the following statement:
“I would like to share with you how the Bible answers that question, if I could.“
This question communicates that I will be sharing what the Bible has to say about a question that was asked earlier in our conversation. It also communicates that I desire that person’s permission to proceed with sharing the truth of the Word of God with them. Here is the main part of this post that I need your help in discussing. If I were to request permission using this statement:
“I would like to share with you what I discovered in the Bible about that question if it is all right.“
would you notice any difference? Is there any subtle difference in the person’s understanding of the sufficiency of scripture in these two statements? Which statement, would you say, more clearly expresses the total sufficiency of scripture? Are there any differences in the statements concerning the theological understanding of revelation?
53 Comments
January 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I’m probably in left field on this but #1 says the Bible answers a question, whereas #2 refers to its merely containing something about it.
#1 seems authoritative, #2 doesn’t.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
they are both equally valid statements and there is nothing at all wrong with either…
January 17th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with either; although, I think that the first is “better.” Our society is post-modern. Truth is either irrelevant or subjective to the individual (“that’s great if it works for you…”)
I agree with Bob, the first is more authoritative. The second, while probably more relational than the first, might allow that “it’s ok for you” response. The Gospel presentation is too important – and authoritative – to be subjected to “my discovery.”
Brian
January 17th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Tim,
I completely agree with you. Words do matter. That was the point of my post on sbcIMPACT in which you playfully called me the “verbal police.”
Glad to see you agree.
Les
January 17th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Good question Tim,
I also believe like several have already mentioned…… there really is a difference in the two questions. One thing I have come to understand is that there is only one true interpretation of scripture, and I do not get it right all of the time. (No matter how hard I try). But, the interpretation has not changed, so depending upon scripture or “what the bible has to say about it”, would be a very good approach. Even if I just discovered it,…I would want the person to understand that the meaning is not based upon me, and that it is always based upon God’s word.
In our church statement of faith, we make it very clear in our opening paragraph that as we mature and find something that needs to be changed in the SOF, we will change it to more accurately reflect what scripture has said.
Blessings,
Chris
January 17th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
to say that the first is superior is ludicrous! how else can you show someone something unless you show them what you have discovered? you are not saying “in my opinion” this or that. you are simply saying that you have discovered the truth about an issue and are asking permission to present it…what is wrong with that? if there is something wrong with that statement then one must first claim infallibility!
I can’t believe this is even debatable. there is nothing at all wrong with either statement…they are both equally valid.
sheeshhhhhhh…can we get real around here!
lol
“Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”
2 Timothy 2:14-15 (ESV)
January 17th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Brother IFOX,
There is not anything wrong with using either,…I think what the question is asking….is there any difference? Certainly there is…and discovery will be part of either. I personally like to point people back to scripture because I am fallible.
I don’t think Tim was trying to upset anyone….
Blessings,
Chris
January 17th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
brother Chris,
no…I certainly don’t believe brother Tim was trying to upset anyone either.
of course…there is a difference because not all the words are the same. (like asking if there is a difference between the NASB and ESV…) but the implications are equally valid, that’s my point. one is not more “accurate” or faithful than the other.
January 17th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Brother IF,
Regardless of how lubricious you believe the responses of others to be, there is a difference in the statements. Especially if these statements are part of a learning discipline. If one has to learn a statement word-for-word it means something for the wording to change from the first to the second. If I were just speaking to someone about something there is nothing wrong in and of itself to use the second statement. However, to change the first statement to the second is the issue that raises concern for me. As has been stated earlier, I am not trying to upset anyone.
Blessings,
Tim
January 17th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Brother Bob,
Your assessment is my concern. If the second statement is used it takes away the authority that one places it on Scripture and moves that authority to a personal preference.
Brother Brian,
You said; “The Gospel presentation is too important – and authoritative – to be subjected to ‘my discovery.’” You are spot on with that statement. That is exactly the reason this post was placed out for discussion.
Brother Chris,
Wouldn’t you agree that in society today, we need make certain that now one believes we are presenting what ‘we believe’ scripture teaches?
Brother Les,
I am not trying to play verbal police, I am asking if there is a difference in the statements.
Blessings,
Tim
January 17th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Brother Tim,
I wholeheartedly agree. As I have put forward in other posts,….I would be surprised if most church members know what the gospel is….much less those who have not even heard it. It is vitally important to be clear concerning the definition of the gospel and clear by what authority the gospel exists.
Somehow our church culture has moved to the position of relative definitions of the gospel (just plain being lazy). In other words, most definitions are not really hitting the target….but instead, getting sort of close to it, hoping people will be open up enough to ask more questions and not get offended…..and most church members welcome these “sort of” definitions as something positive. That sort of reasoning simply does not bring glory to God.
Those that are being saved don’t “sort of” arrive in the kingdom.
Blessings,
Chris
January 17th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
When the citizens of Blogtown agree from all the various streets and avenues plus those of us who live in the darkness at the edge of town it would seem someone in high and lofty places should take note and make the proper changes.
Good work, Tim and a fine and proper evaluation.
cb
January 18th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
IMHO, to use the first also implies exhaustive or at least extensive biblical knowledge on the particular subject under discussion. Which statement one uses may depend on the subject under discussion and one’s level of knowledge with how the bible handles that subject. Both statements are valid depending on the topic.
Of course, once the discussion gets down to the nuts and bolts of salvation, then I would be more willing to use the first.
January 18th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Brother Jeff,
You are correct when you say; “once the discussion gets down to the nuts and bolts of salvation, then I would be more willing to use the first.” Let’s say that the statement is in the ‘nuts and bolts of salvation’ in that you are striving to gain permission to further the conversation with a presentation of the Gospel. If that is the case, which statement would you say makes a more accurate statement? Also, if given the chance, would you change the first statement with the second as a statement for requesting permission to share further a presentation of the Gospel?
Blessings,
Tim
January 18th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
So is it God’s revelation or my discovery? Great post, I go with the former.
January 18th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
brothers,
the first statement certainly smacks of personal arrogance and borders on claims to exhaustive knowledge of all the riches of Scripture. it also borders on the claim of personal infallibility.
I say this in humility…someone please help me understand where I am missing the point.
and to be clear…in casual conversation I believe both statements are of equal validity. but in the nuts and bolts of the topic the second statement places the authority upon the Scripture while the first, in a nuts and bolts way, places it (at least as much if not more) on me…
help me understand where I’m not “getting it”.
January 18th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Tim,
Honestly, it would depend on who I’m talking to. If it’s a guy who feels he’s been burned by a Christian stereotype, i.e. judgmental, know it all, conscious of others sin but not of their own, I’d probably use the second one. If it’s a guy without the baggage mentioned above, I’d probably go with the first.
The main thing would be to make sure the discussion centers on Jesus, what He’s done, and how He fills our need for a savior. At this point in a conversation, I’m not too worried what exactly he believes about God/the bible/etc. I simply want to communicate the Truth to him. I can’t convince him anyway, the Holy Spirit has to do that. If God uses me to bring this guy to Christ, then I will personally disciple him and teach him about the inerrant, authoritative nature of scripture.
I hope I didn’t get off point there.
Jeff
January 18th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Irreverend Fox is right. I was about to say the same thing. The second statement holds Scripture higher than the first, in my opinion. The locus of truth in the first statement seems to be in the individual interpreting Scripture rather than in Scripture itself. If I claim to speak authoritatively and not humbly, then Truth begins and ends with what I say it is. In the second statement, when I say that I have discovered something that the Bible says, it sounds like I am going to Scripture for Truth and am allowing it to speak to me and form me, instead of already knowing what it says and using it for my own ends.
Now, any controversy over these statements are superfluous and based on semantics. In reality, the statements say basically the same thing. But sense Tim is pitting them against one another, a divide has been created in our perspective and we have to see them with the differences that have been created. Both statements assume absolute Truth. If Tim was really trying to prove his point, he could have said, “In my journey I have discoverd that Scripture contains some ideas that might be helpful in this situation,” or something like that.
January 18th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Brother IF,
You say; “it also borders on the claim of personal infallibility.” about the first statement. In all due respect; Are you Serious? The first statement does not make a claim that one says the Bible says what they say, it says the Bible says what it says about salvation. The second statement claims the personal infallibility that you reference. The second statement rests solely on the discovery of the one making the statement. The authority rests on the one making the discovery.
Brother Jeff,
I agree with you. My point is the statement changes from a statement of fact to a statement of knowledge.
Brother Alan,
Your argument seems to reveal a doubt as to what the scripture teaches about the gospel. If one cannot speak authoritatively that Scripture reveals the Gospel, then what can one speak authoritatively to? If we are discussing PPL, then I would openly and frequently use the second statement. However, the Gospel is not something that is open to interpretation.
Blessings,
Tim
January 19th, 2008 at 6:06 am
brother Tim,
in all do respect, yes, I am being serious. the first statement (if taken as we are discussing this, in a nuts and bolts way) is different than the first because it does not confess any discovery at all. it simply states that the one doing the proclaiming knows all the Bible has to say about the topic…the second statements is asking if one can show the other what the one has discovered, so far.
the first statement leaves no room for human error, misunderstanding, misinterpretation, misjudgment, overemphasis, imbalance, prejudice, or ignorance on the part of the one doing the witnessing. the first statement places my tradition and interpretation, potentially, in an infallible place. the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy both believe (if you wrestle them down to it) that the Scripture is sufficient for faith…but that only their interpretation is valid. so in a very real way, especially more so in Eastern Orthodoxy, what they are basically saying is “let me share with you how the Bible answers that question” (in a sense…they would avoid saying it like that lest they be misunderstood as being Protestant…but if you ask a well educated RC or EO they would tell you that they fundamentally have the right interpretation of the Bible and can tell you what both what it says and what it means).
Jehovah’s Witnesses DO say statements like that, frankly.
the second statement places the Bible above all and places us in our rightful places…pilgrims, students, learners, sojourners and fallible.
Again…in casual conversation, both are equally valid.
January 19th, 2008 at 6:49 am
also brother Tim,
I’m not sure about you…but I know that I don’t have a full or perfect understanding of the Gospel…there is so much more that I need to learn and those answers are found through more prayer and study of Scripture…for the rest of eternity (I’m a slow learner and even slower follower).
January 19th, 2008 at 6:56 am
ok…this is my last comment…I need to think of everything I want to say before I hit “submit comment”…please forgive me.
the second statement is not necessarily rooted in postmodernism. it is not saying that we can’t know or don’t know anything or that the Scriptures are un-interpretable. just the opposite actually. taken at face value it is saying “this” is what I have DISCOVERED thus far from the study of the Scripture…but there is more where that came from. In a nuts and bolts way I believe the second statement is more balanced and places both the Scripture and the proclaimer in their proper place.
January 19th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Colossians 1:25-29 Of this church I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, (26) that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, (27) to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (28) We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ. (29) For this purpose also I labor, striving according to His power, which mightily works within me.
The word “proclaim” is an interesting word in the Greek,…it does not carry a discovery tone with it… I think it is very instructive what Paul teaches in the above passage…. “to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you”. It seems the nature of Paul’s instruction concerning the gospel is something that is not discovered, it is proclaimed. The gospel is “now manifested to His saints”.
The bible states that it is not arrogant to proclaim and know without a shadow of doubt, that the gospel is the absolute power of salvation to those who believe and that is how God has preserved it in His scripture. The Spirit of God (His Word) is much more reliable than what I have discovered.
The Word of God was revealed to me by the Spirit….I did not discover anything about it, ….but He (the Spirit) continues to teach me. This is my sanctification. A Pharisee would say “let me tell you what I discovered about the scripture today, in fact if you can hang around with me for several hundred years, I should have more discoveries that we can write down and follow”.
I do agree with IFOX that there is nothing so different about our use of the word “discovery” especially its broad use in the American culture,…. unless one begins to believe that discovery has some spiritual value. What God brings or reveals to us “has the value”, and all He brings to us is based upon the Bible, and not even “our” interpretation of it. As servants of God and the flock of God, it is incumbent of any Pastor to know the gospel of God. If one is not able to teach with the authority of the bible concerning the gospel, it would disqualify one from being a Pastor of the flock.
1Timothy 3:15-16 “but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth. (16) By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.”
This is nothing new to you guys….
Blessings,
Chris
January 19th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Chris,
I just don’t see whether either use is an issue. If we push this discussion too far, gnats will be well strained, but the camel will go down like honey. I agree with IFox that there is a humility in the second phrase and it in no way reduces the authority of the God’s word. It simply shows an awareness of personal fallibility in the one doing the sharing. We’re fallible, God’s word is not.
Where I live, non-Christians are tired of know it all Christians who inadvertently come across as morally superior to the lost, i.e. we’re better than they are. While I don’t have a problem with the first phrase, after further thought, I doubt I’ll use it here. I also don’t believe someone is making a mistake by using the second phrase exclusively.
This is an interesting discussion, but when it’s carried too far, we lose sight of what’s really important — communicating the Gospel. Whether you use the first or second phrase, God’s purposes will be accomplished and His name and Son will be glorified.
Jeff
January 19th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Jeff,
I agree with what you have said in your first paragraph….but realize, that without biblical authority the gnats do get strained, but not by those who clarify the gospel. The Pharisees are the poster child for ambiguity and not understanding the gospel, thus coming up with another gospel. Look at the Mormon,….they are very peaceful, loving individuals that would love to discuss Christ with you anytime and any place (certainly more than a lot of the saints), but without biblical authority. They have discovered a burning in the belly that leads to another gospel.
While there is absolutely no room for “know it all” Christians, ….there is absolute certainty concerning the gospel. It is simple, powerful and effective. I agree with you,….we simply must make it known and God is glorified.
Thanks for your work in Amarillo!
Blessings,
Chris
January 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
brother Chris,
you really grasp the truth of the doctrine of the gospel, “absolutely”? you are sure that you don’t misunderstand any of it?
January 19th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Brother IF,
Ahh, when was the last time you were visited by a Jehovah’s Witness? The last time that I was visited, I remember the exact phrase, “this is what I have discovered”. While, I believe everyone will agree both statements are ok in and of themselves, I just have a concern that the first was changed to the second. The second statement certainly presents a case based more on personal discovery than on God’s revelation to man.
Brother Chris,
You stated; “I do agree with IFOX that there is nothing so different about our use of the word “discovery” especially its broad use in the American culture,…. unless one begins to believe that discovery has some spiritual value.” and that is the point. In a Gospel presentation and one uses the term ‘I have discovered’ it gives the sense of spiritual superiority.
Brother Jeff,
Land know that I certainly pressed this around in my mind before I placed it out there. The reason? I did not want to appear as if I were arguing over the number of angels that dance on the head of a pin. However, I am merely trying to point out that the first statement was changed to the second, in a gospel presentation. This is what my concern centers around.
Blessings,
Tim
January 19th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
brother Tim,
wow…that is surprising. usually Mormons talk in those more subjective terms. I consider myself to have fairly extensive experience with JW’s. I spent over a year as a regular attendee of their Tuesday night books studies in the local Kingdom Hall and entertained between 2 and 4 (almost) every Saturday during that same time. I’m hoping to get back into that habit…we moved from that town to Akron to plant our second church so the distance has made it hard for me to be with them…it’s been about 6 months to answer your question.
I have found JW’s usually saying things like “the Bible teaches this” while Mormons usually tell me “I just prayed and asked for wisdom and truly believe this is true…” but maybe you have met a JW who spoke in more subjective terms.
I’ve always found it terribly sad when the vast majority of Southern Baptists do not even know what a Lexicon is…while the little JW ladies and their husbands would come over to our house every Saturday would bust out Lexicons and knew how to use them! Not JW Lexicons either…we used mine all the time!
As for the two statements one could argue, as you’ve pointed out, that the second statement can also come off arrogant. There is indeed a point where truth must be set against non-truth and just because we don’t know it all doesn’t mean we know nothing.
January 19th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
1 John 5:11-14 “And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. (12) He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. (13) These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. (14) This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us.”
According to scripture I have absolute knowledge and confidence that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation and it is effective.
Yes, with that I am absolutely sure…it is powerful, but not complicated…..and I am personally glad it is not complicated!
Blessings,
Chris
January 19th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Brother IF,
You said; “as you’ve pointed out, that the second statement can also come off arrogant.” I am not arguing that the second statement is arrogant. I am arguing that using such a statement, in a gospel presentation, places more emphasis on what one has discovered than on what God has revealed in His Word.
Blessings,
Tim
January 19th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Brother Chris,
You are correct. We can certainly KNOW=personal life changing experience the Gospel in the simplicity of presenting it. It does seem that the more we debate this the more it appears that some may feel that such knowledge is infallible. I am not advocating infallibility in what I say, but when it comes to the Gospel presenting the simplicity of the Gospel is based on God’s infallible word.
Blessings,
Tim
January 19th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
brother Tim,
lol…I’m getting dizzy! both statements are dealing with what we have discovered (unless we believe we know it all). in the first statement it is (or should be) implied and the second makes it clear.
January 19th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Brother IF,
Do not mean to make you dizzy. Let me run at it from another angle.
Some years ago people would say; The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it. Then realized the flaw in that saying and changed it to; The Bible says it, that settles it.
What I am trying to say about the first statement is that the Bible says it, whether I have discovered it or not, this is the way to salvation. That is all I am trying to say. The second statement places, to me, the insight into salvation on an individual instead on the Scripture.
Blessings,
Tim
January 20th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Not to parse words here, (why do I feel like I’m getting the strainer out?), but both statements include the phrases “about that question” or “that question”. This leaves a clear implication that a particular question has been asked and the presenter is about to answer it from God’s word. So, what’s the question? Is it, “how can I be saved”? Answer it with confidence, with the first phrase if you prefer. God’s word is crystal clear on this issue. I may use the second, for no other reason than to show a little humility, so that I don’t appear arrogant. However, if you’re trying to answer another question, one that may not be so clear in scripture, the second indicates that one may not know everything the bible says about that subject.
Once again, the authority of the bible has not been threatened and the one hearing has heard the truth!!
Also, the second question can be used by one new in the faith. Being a new Christian, he doesn’t know all the salvation verses yet and so uses a statement that reflects his daily growth in Christ.
This is why I don’t believe you can reach a conclusion about these two statements. There are too many individuals with varied circumstances in their lives. Dependent on the circumstances, each statement is acceptable and that in no way devalues the authority of God’s word.
Last of all, don’t forget the Holy Spirit is in charge anyway. He can use both statements to glorify Christ, to convict of sin, and the Father will use that to draw the lost to the Son.
Grace,
Jeff
January 20th, 2008 at 9:53 am
brother Tim,
I have no problem with your last clarification at all…I agree…the truth is in the Scriptures regardless if we have discovered it yet. my point I guess is that we can only proclaim and teach what we have discovered…we can’t talk about stuff we don’t know yet.
January 21st, 2008 at 10:33 am
Brother IFOX,
You said….“my point I guess is that we can only proclaim and teach what we have discovered…we can’t talk about stuff we don’t know yet.”
I believe the heart of the gospel is being tossed around in our discussion here. Is the gospel really outside of us, owned by God, and comes to us being applied by the Holy Spirit; or is the definition of the gospel one that “I” discover. Since none seeks after God,…the gospel is probably not defined or even discovered by us, it is applied.
Christ followers absolutely know it is the power of the gospel that makes the change and causes us to know Christ. If that is not the case….then Christians must not exist. We don’t just stumble upon the gospel; Christ seeks His own and the power of the gospel is applied to us by the Holy Spirit. Christians proclaim what they really know. Of course, I agree with you, that we can’t know everything, nor will ever, not even in heaven. We still depend upon the imputed righteousness of Christ, even in heaven. Christ receives glory forever!
Maybe we can’t talk about some things as articulate as we would like, or even understand things as deep as we would like. That will always be the case. At least it is for me. But, that simply points to the authority of scripture….yet we can proclaim, and at a minimum read the word of God to others. In fact, that is the best thing we can do.
I think I see your point,…but there is confidence and assurance in knowing Christ. I’m sure you would not disagree with that….
Blessings,
Chris
January 21st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Tim,
I have no doubt about what Scripture says concerning the Gospel. It is clear. However, my point is that Scripture is the authority, not my interpretation of Scripture. Taking your two questions on face value, I do not see much difference. Your statements are loaded however, from your perspective, so you see them differently than others do. My point is that you did not fully communicate what you were trying to say because your choice of words did not explain your point adequately. That is why I offered an alternative.
If I discover what Scripture is saying about something, it does not affect the authority of Scripture. It only speaks to the process by which I have learned what Scripture is saying. After the discovery, I can speak authoritatively only because Scripture speaks authoritatively. Using words like “discover” does not harm Scripture – it only shows the process by which I have learned Truth. It is a word that tells others that they can learn the same thing. It puts the locus of Truth in Scripture instead of my arguments.
Asking the hearer if it is “alright” to share with them is just a sign of respect. If your audience does not give you permission to speak, then they will not listen to you anyway.
My whole point is that I don’t see much difference in the two statements accept for the fact that the second statement invites the hearer in to make the same discovery of Biblical Truth as the speaker. The first statement closes off that process and requires the hearer to just believe what the speaker is saying because they are saying it. Both deal with absolute truth – only one invites the uniformed into the process of learning for themselves.
Maybe I am reading too much into this. I assure you, Tim, that I share the same view of absolute Truth and inerrancy of Scripture that you do – perhaps even more so. It’s just that your two questions do not portray what you intend, if they are taken on face value. That’s my opinion, however.
January 21st, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Alan,
I agree with you,…in that we certainly discover and realize things….in other words, we learn.
Good comment…..
I’m just not sure that it is the point that Tim has put forward.
Blessings,
-Chris
January 21st, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Brother Jeff,
I do not want this to turn into a ’smack down’ of a particular Gospel presentation, that is the reason I have placed just the two statements. However, I have spoken with those responsible at Lifeway and they are monitoring this discussion, because they are concerned at how people view this. To their credit they have been very open with me about my concern.
The original question is; “In your personal opinion, what do you understand it takes for a person to go to heaven and spend eternity with Jesus?” That is the question that is being answered. The reason that I had a concern is because we have asked for their personal opinion and have received a works answer before we make this statement. That is the reason that, it seems to me, the second statement is more ambiguous than the first. It opens the conversation to being; “that is your opinion and now this is my opinion“.
Brother IF,
I believe Brother Chris has explained a position very eloquently.
Brother Chris,
You have graciously expressed my concern.
Brother Alan,
See my explanation to Brother Jeff. I agree with you about asking for permission and it certainly needs to be obtained before moving forward with the presentation. However, after asking someone about their ‘personal opinion’, then saying “I discovered” places the each as giving their personal opinions. For me, and I believe this is where I have the concern, the Gospel is not based on my opinion. The Bible is true whether I believe it or not. I am only sharing what the truth of the Scripture teaches concerning the Gospel.
To all,
This is great dialogs.
Blessings,
Tim
January 21st, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Tim,
What does Lifeway have to do with this? Is this in someway related to some type of survey that they have done? Are you polling to get information as to what people believe about Lifeway salvation questions without giving us the whole context? I hope not.
If the original question is, “In your personal opinion, what do you understand it takes for a person to go to heaven and spend eternity with Jesus?” then why didn’t you tell us that to begin with? Using language like “I have discovered” would still be appropriate because it is just another way of saying that we have learned something. You have to learn something before you can speak authoritatively.
Yes, the gospel is true whether I believe it or not, but the idea of asking and answering questions means that someone is communicating that Truth. I can hardly communicate the Truth unless I believe it. “Faith comes by hearing.” For someone to hear, someone has to preach. For that person to preach, they must believe it themselves. They cannot believe it unless they have heard and accepted the Truth of the Gospel for themselves. At some point they learned, or discovered the Truth. It is basic communication and it is exactly the argument that Paul makes in Romans 10. Yes, the Gospel stands alone. But, at some point, I believed that Gospel.
In the future, if you are raising questions about Lifeway polls or studies, it might be helpful if you gave us all of the context at one time so that we could respond intelligently. It seemed like there was something behind your question that was not clear because to have the feelings that you had about that particular language did not make a lot of sense on face value.
January 21st, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Brother Allan,
You have jumped completely to a wrong conclusion as you presume something of me that is not correct. I do not have time to explain right now, but will later.
Blessings,
Tim
January 21st, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Tim,
Glad to hear that. That is why I asked the questions. I haven’t jumped anywhere – things were starting to look a certain way so I asked. I wanted to give you the chance to answer before I made up my mind. I take your word that you were not doing what I thought I saw.
January 21st, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Tim,
If you use the second question you then go from asking their opinion to giving yours. Who is to say your opinion is better? In presenting the gospel I would feel much more in the will of God asking the first question. In that I am sharing his infallible word that is not corrupted by my opinion. When you say I would like to share with you how the bible answers that question, you should if allowed then just quote the scriptures not opinions.
January 21st, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Brother Alan,
First, as you have seen this concerns the FAITH outline. I have done FAITH now for 10 semesters. I did not do FAITH this past fall and heard that Lifeway had condensed the 16 weeks down to 12 weeks. I wanted to do the 12 week semester because in September 2008, Lifeway will completely phase out the 16 week semester.
I received this condensed semester the week before we began FAITH. I began through it and ran across this statement. I then called the FAITH people at Lifeway and discussed this very concern with them. Of course as you have seen in my comments we disagreed so I offered to place it out here so they could see that I was not the only one that saw this. I told them that I did not want this to turn into a FAITH bashing post so I placed it out there the way I did. That way we could focus directely on the statement an not bring into the comment thread anyone’s preconceived notions that FAITH was not an adequate Gospel presentation.
That is the purpose of presenting it like I did. Now, after answering your concern, let me ask you a question. Why would one desire to change from the first statement to the second?
Blessings,
Tim
January 21st, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Tim, to answer your question, I have no idea. Like I said previously before I even began to see that there was a deeper context, I don’t think that the questions are that different. The language is a bit different, but they essentially mean the same thing.
I think that we are very leery of words like “discover”, “opinion”, “feel”, “journey,” etc. We are afraid that if we embrace those words, we are embracing the entire postmodern hermeneutic. I don’t think that is the case, because those words have real meaning and in the context of your question they remain appropriate. They just seem to be more inviting in an evangelistic dialogue with a lost person. Baptists have always believed in inviting sinners to understand, believe in, and embrace the gospel. I don’t see this as any different and I don’t think that the authority of Scripture has been sacrificed.
January 21st, 2008 at 10:57 pm
By the way, thanks for all the background info. It wasn’t necessary as I took you at your word before, but it was helpful to see where you were coming from.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:07 am
Tim,
I’m glad your keeping those rascals honest, ….it appears this is targeted to their emphasis on lay people to be “Conversational—makes sharing the gospel more natural”.
We don’t use that material,…but I’m glad you have raised the question….it can only help.
Blessings,
Chris
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:28 am
Tim,
I know that in the arena of evangelism you are a very knowledgeable voice. Therefore, I greatly agree with the comment of Chris Johnson he made in #47.
Thank you for bringing this to the attention of us all who work to advance the Kingdom.
cb
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Tim,
Lest you get the big head from my last comment, I also know you know nothing of football since your are a TAR HEEL.
cb
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 am
Brother CB,
Not only do I NOT PULL for the Tarheels in football, but I do know that any football team in NC can be Louisiana-Monroe. Even my Baptist alma that is beginning their football program in 2008 can give that team a run for their money. But I digress. No one outside of the SABANATION knows who Louisiana-Monroe is or even where they are located? By their name, they do not know where they are located. But I bet you a nickel to a doughnut hole those around the fine state of Ala. know.
Now, to the post. I believe you will agree that, while the second statement is not bad in and of itself, the first statement is a stronger wording to advance the sufficiency of Scripture.
Blessings,
Tim
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:29 am
Brother CB,
Instead of; but I do know that any football team in NC can be Louisiana-Monroe, it should be but I do know that any football team in NC can beat Louisiana-Monroe.
Blessings,
Tim
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Tim,
To bring up such bitter memories is beneath a fellow graduate of SEBTS even if you did fall 500 feet from a plane and hurt your head.
cb
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
FIRST is the preferred…..it realies on the Bible being right(the authority). The second gives you the ‘credit’ for discovering something in the Bible that maybe nobody else has found(=arrogance,elitism?)…go with the simplest and give God and His Word the credit due…understanding that the re-generate will not fully understand.
II Tim 4:5