Leading to Christ

[Jeri Tanner]

38 Now the man from whom the demons had departed begged Him that he might be with Him. But Jesus sent him away, saying, 39 “Return to your own house, and tell what great things God has done for you.” And he went his way and proclaimed throughout the whole city what great things Jesus had done for him.

I would have to say that maybe God might have somebody not ordained wax eloquent in the public square.

This is exactly one of the examples of lay witnessing we've pointed to in the thread, Lynnie- as well as the Samaritan woman at the well, who witnessed to her neighbors of what Christ had done for her and invited them to come and hear for themselves. To bear witness of Christ is to testify to others what we have seen and known of him. We commend him to others, waxing eloquent as best we can.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Distinctions.....

Consider what the pulpit actually does. In this dumb age, there are churches and pastors wanting to destroy the pulpit by making them either invisible or plexiglass so as to not cause a separation, a separation that God has ordained for a purpose, between the leadership/ordained man and those that sit in the pews. Tragic! As well, the milk crate and voice amplifier does the same thing. Any man (or woman-and this is one of the potholes) that takes up a milk crate is elevating themselves above the normal person. You don't see a problem with this? Typical conversation at work or in a grocery store does not resemble this. This is the distinction many have tried to convey in this thread-but apparently, to no avail.

I have made mention a few times, what if the person that comes to faith under your discussion asks, 'there is water-what forbids me from being baptized?', what will u do?

Another issue I see, that irritates me to no end is the deescalating of the other components of the gospel; that being, the infrastructure. Is prayer any less important to the gospel? Mercy? Serving the person. Inviting them to church where the means of grace are actually distributed? The mentality on the street is that the only important thing is the actual proclamation and this is so sad. The prayer warriors in the back are as important as the message proclaimed, but given the temperament in this age, i.e. dispensationalism, even the reformed are giving in to this nonsense-this could be because most of our people are actually poorly trained and come out of Dispensational backgrounds and hence, still have all that, 'lets get out there before someone falls through the cracks' thinking.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Finally, I am a lay-person. I am a seminary student. I am an old guy (60 yrs old this April). I do not feel neglected being a laymen. I do not feel short changed. I know my place in the polity chain and am fine with it. It does not destroy nor hamper my witness in any way. I keep moving forward in Christ. I play a part in my church's commission. It's all good.

 

[timfost]

I had two JWs come to my house today. I told them about the Jesus of the Bible and the reason we have hope in Him. I encouraged them to believe in the Divine Man they refuse to worship (quite literally-- I asked them if I should worship Jesus and they said no, we should worship God). I told them about Thomas saying to Him "my Lord and my God." I asked if Thomas was violating the first commandment. They said they would have to study that. After some more words, I invited them to believe in the Jesus that scripture reveals.

All this to say, I think we're all in agreement that this is appropriate, even if some would call this evangelism and others witnessing.

Agree?

 

[Jeri Tanner]

One more thought on the OP, and this is not stated great and is just offered up for reflection.

The OP reflects, in my view, the tenor of NT (and OT) teaching on the role of pastors/preachers and the Church in evangelism. We won't find, I don't believe, anything in Scripture to give reason to believe that what the OP is trying to get at is not true. The view of the means of grace found in the ordained ministry is called the ordinary means of grace, but we don't feel the weight of what that means. "Ordinary" seems a weak or insufficient word in our time; we don't recognize the boundaries that word imposes as people once did. It's an old word that dates from the early 15th century, from the Old French ordinarie...and directly from the Latin" ordinarius"- customary, regular, usual, orderly,"; that from ordo (genitive ordinis) "row, rank, series, arrangement" (see order (n.)). When you get to ordo you can more clearly see, maybe, the establishment of an order and an arrangement, which in this case we need to pay attention to. (The words "ordain" and "ordinance" also stem from ordo.)

If a Scriptural methodology (in this case, how evangelism is defined and practiced) is God's orderly arrangement, his means given to the church, then it is a spiritual, ordained means; and shouldn't we tremble lest we casually, even though with every good intention, actually end up despising it?

The more I reflect on it and study it, the more I think I see that Scripture gives us no encouragement to expect conversions of souls outside the ministry of the church. That's not to say it doesn't happen- but what might be the price to pay if we are zealous for something but missing God's prescribed way of going about it.

 

[Pergamum]

How are we defining church here? And ministry?

Is not the witness of all believers the ministry of the church?

If we can distinguish between Big-M Ministry (the ordained preacher and the sacraments), and little-m ministry (the lay-witness of all believers) then it is true that most conversions happen due to the ministry of the church. Even when one is saved reading the Scriptures alone in one's solitary room, we can praise God for the Christian publishers or the Gideons or whoever distributed that Scripture to that saved soul.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

How are we defining church here? And ministry?

Is not the witness of all believers the ministry of the church?

If we can distinguish between Big-M Ministry (the ordained preacher and the sacraments), and little-m ministry (the lay-witness of all believers) then it is true that most conversions happen due to the ministry of the church. Even when one is saved reading the Scriptures alone in one's solitary room, we can praise God for the Christian publishers or the Gideons or whoever distributed that Scripture to that saved soul.

Church as the entity given the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 16:19); the ministry as its ordained officers.

 

[Dachaser]

How about starting with defining terms to avoid this continued back and forth.

What is evangelizing?
What is witnessing?

Once you and your interlocutors are in agreement with the terms being loosely bantered about, the discussion will likely proceed and be edifying.

As a suggestion, how about we define evangelism, as the proclamation of the Gospel by those whom God has called, have been trained, examined, and vetted, and then commissioned thereunto.

Furthermore, let's define witnessing as being ready to give an answer for the hope we have, and a defense of the faith, and a good word in season to those who need it, while affirming that these are not the teaching/preaching of the gospel.

That "in season" bit above is important. The phrase teaches us that the duty of witnessing is opportunistic upon circumstances that may arise, e.g., normal conversations that may present themselves, as in standing in the grocery line, casual conversations at work or play, etc. It is not grabbing an empty milk carton, ascending it, and starting to wax eloquent to the crowd in the public square.

Work for you?

Yes it does, as that would be how I would understand the difference between those 2 terms.

 

[Dachaser]

Nope. Show me ANYWHERE in scripture where this happened. Allow the bible to be your guide in faith and practice.

Are you saying here that the only valid salvation would be under duly ordained clergy then?

 

[Dachaser]

38 Now the man from whom the demons had departed begged Him that he might be with Him. But Jesus sent him away, saying, 39 “Return to your own house, and tell what great things God has done for you.” And he went his way and proclaimed throughout the whole city what great things Jesus had done for him.

I would have to say that maybe God might have somebody not ordained wax eloquent in the public square.

There are street preachers.

 

[Dachaser]

Distinctions.....

Consider what the pulpit actually does. In this dumb age, there are churches and pastors wanting to destroy the pulpit by making them either invisible or plexiglass so as to not cause a separation, a separation that God has ordained for a purpose, between the leadership/ordained man and those that sit in the pews. Tragic! As well, the milk crate and voice amplifier does the same thing. Any man (or woman-and this is one of the potholes) that takes up a milk crate is elevating themselves above the normal person. You don't see a problem with this? Typical conversation at work or in a grocery store does not resemble this. This is the distinction many have tried to convey in this thread-but apparently, to no avail.

I have made mention a few times, what if the person that comes to faith under your discussion asks, 'there is water-what forbids me from being baptized?', what will u do?

Another issue I see, that irritates me to no end is the deescalating of the other components of the gospel; that being, the infrastructure. Is prayer any less important to the gospel? Mercy? Serving the person. Inviting them to church where the means of grace are actually distributed? The mentality on the street is that the only important thing is the actual proclamation and this is so sad. The prayer warriors in the back are as important as the message proclaimed, but given the temperament in this age, i.e. dispensationalism, even the reformed are giving in to this nonsense-this could be because most of our people are actually poorly trained and come out of Dispensational backgrounds and hence, still have all that, 'lets get out there before someone falls through the cracks' thinking.

Lets take your given example of us speaking to a sinner about Jesus, and that person gets saved, and then wants to be water baptized. At that point, he would be turning over to the ordained minister for that to happen.

 

[Herald]

even if some would call this evangelism and others witnessing.

It is evangelizing and it is witnessing. Do more of it! Neither detracts from the role of ordained ministers.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

It is evangelizing and it is witnessing. Do more of it! Neither detracts from the role of ordained ministers.

It's not a question of any sort of fear or worry of detracting from the role of ministers as I think you may mean it. It's a question of what the Bible teaches and shows by example and by good and necessary inference about the duties and roles of ordained men and lay members. In that sense, one wouldn't want to distract from God's order and arrangement of things.

 

[Herald]

It's not a question of any sort of fear or worry of detracting from the role of ministers as I think you may mean it. It's a question of what the Bible teaches and shows by example and by good and necessary inference about the duties and roles of ordained men and lay members. In that sense, one wouldn't want to distract from God's order and arrangement of things.

Jeri, and a lay-person sharing the gospel is not a threat to good and necessary inference (as you put it). I had a conversation about the gospel with a gentleman while I was waiting for tires to be put on my car. Should I have avoided that conversation because of some sort of ecclesiastical censorship? When Jesus said, "Let your light shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your father who is in heaven" (Mat. 5:16), what greater work can we do than to let our conversation reflect the Lord who has so gloriously saved us? I think we can hide behind "God's order and arrangement of things". If we applied that as a formula for the whole of the Christia life we can get out of doing anything. It's not my intent to pressure others into sharing their faith. But it is very much my point to state that doing so is not unbiblical. In fact, it should be encouraged.

 

[earl40]

Jeri, and a lay-person sharing the gospel is not a threat to good and necessary inference (as you put it). I had a conversation about the gospel with a gentleman while I was waiting for tires to be put on my car. Should I have avoided that conversation because of some sort of ecclesiastical censorship? When Jesus said, "Let your light shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your father who is in heaven" (Mat. 5:16), what greater work can we do than to let our conversation reflect the Lord who has so gloriously saved us? I think we can hide behind "God's order and arrangement of things". If we applied that as a formula for the whole of the Christia life we can get out of doing anything. It's not my intent to pressure others into sharing their faith. But it is very much my point to state that doing so is not unbiblical. In fact, it should be encouraged.

Bill were you "preaching" and "evangelizing" in the biblical sense as scripture defines? Or were you "witnessing" in this conversation which no one should discourage.

 

[Herald]

Bill were you "preaching" and "evangelizing" in the biblical sense as scripture defines? Or were you "witnessing" in this conversation which no one should discourage.

I didn't have a pulpit nor a congregation in front of me, so no, I wasn't preaching. I was sharing law and gospel and appealed to this man to repent of his sins and place his faith in Christ.

 

[GRJ]

I began thinking of Philip in Acts 8 with regard to this thread. He was ordained to help serving tables so the Apostles could devote themselves to ministry and prayer. It seems that Philip was not ordained specifically as a preacher; maybe the office of deacon(?) Yet he was preaching in Samaria with great effect.
Ac 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Please correct me if I'm off the rails here, thank you.

 

[Scott Bushey]

One must consider the timing here. It was extraordinary. For example, I am in the Sudan and a man I am witnessing to, comes to faith. There are no churches there-period! Can I baptize him?

 

[earl40]

I began thinking of Philip in Acts 8 with regard to this thread. He was ordained to help serving tables so the Apostles could devote themselves to ministry and prayer. It seems that Philip was not ordained specifically as a preacher; maybe the office of deacon(?) Yet he was preaching in Samaria with great effect.
Ac 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Please correct me if I'm off the rails here, thank you.

This is a good question. I have heard a couple of answers concerning this. One being that Philip was ordained later as a Pastor. The other is that The Gospel was in its infancy where the office of evangelist was still in effect, which has now passed. Either one has Philip ordained to a higher office than he started with.

 

[earl40]

One must consider the timing here. It was extraordinary. For example, I am in the Sudan and a man I am witnessing to, comes to faith. There are no churches there-period! Can I baptize him?

That would indeed prevent the person from Sudan from being added to the visible church.

 

[Ed Walsh]

That would indeed prevent the person from Sudan from being added to the visible church.

I would love to post the whole context of the quote below, but that would make the post too long. So below is just one example of the teaching of Turretin on the subject of the extraordinary call to the ministry and even forming churches where there's no predecessor(s) available.

XVIII. If today believers, carried by a tempest to the most distant regions of the earth, should be shipwrecked upon the shore among barbarous people, entirely strangers to religion, and pressed by necessity should be compelled to remain there without any hope of returning to their homes, who does not confess that from the law of love they ought to teach the pagans the faith of Christ? And if many of them should perchance be converted, would it not be lawful for them to choose for themselves pastors to constitute a church and provide for its edification and instruction? Would it be better to suffer that light to be extinguished than to establish a ministry for the consolation and salvation of that people, although this could not be done according to the usual order? Thus if perchance it happens in a most severe persecution of a church or province that all the pastors are either entirely destroyed or so scattered that they cannot easily be gathered together or other pastors be obtained elsewhere; in this case would it be more advisable for the believing people to remain without a pastor and without external worship and thus suffer the light of the gospel and all religion to be extinguished than that it should be permitted them to elect and constitute some suitable private person from their own body to feed and teach them, although the received order could not be adhered to? Nay, who does not see that the glory of God and the salvation of believers demands the contrary altogether? No more can it be sought by what right and by what authority and call these things are done than it can be demanded of a citizen what call he has for opposing himself to an inrushing enemy when the leaders are treacherous; or for extinguishing a fire enveloping a house, if others fail. For the case of necessity and the salvation of the republic (which ought to be the supreme law) demands this. It is the same as if I should ask a man what right he had to obey God and to resist Satan. What call he has to procure his own and his neighbor’s salvation. Everyone knows that this is an indispensable necessity.

Turretin, F. (1992–1997). Institutes of Elenctic Theology. (J. T. Dennison Jr., Ed., G. M. Giger, Trans.) (Vol. 3, pp. 221–222). Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing.​

 

[earl40]

I would love to post the whole context of the quote below, but that would make the post too long. So below is just one example of the teaching of Turretin on the subject of the extraordinary call to the ministry and even forming churches where there's no predecessor(s) available.

XVIII. If today believers, carried by a tempest to the most distant regions of the earth, should be shipwrecked upon the shore among barbarous people, entirely strangers to religion, and pressed by necessity should be compelled to remain there without any hope of returning to their homes, who does not confess that from the law of love they ought to teach the pagans the faith of Christ? And if many of them should perchance be converted, would it not be lawful for them to choose for themselves pastors to constitute a church and provide for its edification and instruction? Would it be better to suffer that light to be extinguished than to establish a ministry for the consolation and salvation of that people, although this could not be done according to the usual order? Thus if perchance it happens in a most severe persecution of a church or province that all the pastors are either entirely destroyed or so scattered that they cannot easily be gathered together or other pastors be obtained elsewhere; in this case would it be more advisable for the believing people to remain without a pastor and without external worship and thus suffer the light of the gospel and all religion to be extinguished than that it should be permitted them to elect and constitute some suitable private person from their own body to feed and teach them, although the received order could not be adhered to? Nay, who does not see that the glory of God and the salvation of believers demands the contrary altogether? No more can it be sought by what right and by what authority and call these things are done than it can be demanded of a citizen what call he has for opposing himself to an inrushing enemy when the leaders are treacherous; or for extinguishing a fire enveloping a house, if others fail. For the case of necessity and the salvation of the republic (which ought to be the supreme law) demands this. It is the same as if I should ask a man what right he had to obey God and to resist Satan. What call he has to procure his own and his neighbor’s salvation. Everyone knows that this is an indispensable necessity.

Turretin, F. (1992–1997). Institutes of Elenctic Theology. (J. T. Dennison Jr., Ed., G. M. Giger, Trans.) (Vol. 3, pp. 221–222). Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing.​

Seems like Turretin has a rather high view of the ordained.

"And if many of them should perchance be converted, would it not be lawful for them to choose for themselves pastors to constitute a church and provide for its edification and instruction?"

 

[TylerRay]

I began thinking of Philip in Acts 8 with regard to this thread. He was ordained to help serving tables so the Apostles could devote themselves to ministry and prayer. It seems that Philip was not ordained specifically as a preacher; maybe the office of deacon(?) Yet he was preaching in Samaria with great effect.
Ac 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Please correct me if I'm off the rails here, thank you.

This is a good question. I have heard a couple of answers concerning this. One being that Philip was ordained later as a Pastor. The other is that The Gospel was in its infancy where the office of evangelist was still in effect, which has now passed. Either one has Philip ordained to a higher office than he started with.

The Geneva Bible has this note on Acts 8:5: "Philip, who was before a deacon in Jerusalem, is made an evangelist by God in an extraordinary way."

Later (Ch. 21), we see Philip referred to as an evangelist. Note that he also baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch (8:38).

Evangelists, in the Scriptures, are an extraordinary type of minister of the Word and sacrament, confined to eras in which the church is unsettled. Philip filled this office, as well as acting as a deacon.

 

[GRJ]

The Geneva Bible has this note on Acts 8:5: "Philip, who was before a deacon in Jerusalem, is made an evangelist by God in an extraordinary way."

Later (Ch. 21), we see Philip referred to as an evangelist. Note that he also baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch (8:38).

Evangelists, in the Scriptures, are an extraordinary type of minister of the Word and sacrament, confined to eras in which the church is unsettled. Philip filled this office, as well as acting as a deacon.

Thank you!

 

[Southern Presbyterian]

*MODERATION*

Thread Closed. Time to move on to other items of business.