# Where does evangelism take place?



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

I am hoping this post will clarify what the official preaching of the gospel is and how the lost are reached with the gospel. 

Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?


----------



## Pergamum (Aug 31, 2017)

When you speak of preaching, which of these 13 greek words do you have in mind that are often translated "preach" in various translations?

2097 (Preach 1) euangelizo , "Announce good news."

1229 (Preach 2) diangello , "Widely announce."

2605 (Preach 3) katangello , "Publicly announce."

4283 (Preach 4) proeuangelizomai , "Previously announced good news."

2784 (Preach 5) kerusso , "Proclaim."

4296 (Preach 6) prokerusso , "Previously announced."

1256 (Preach 7) dialegomai , "Discuss."

Akoe (0189), "hearing." Translated "preached" in Heb.4.2b.

Laleo (2980), "to speak." Translated "preach," "preached" or "preaching" in Mk.2.2, Act.8.25, 11.19, 13.42, 14.25 and 16.6.

Logos (3056), "message, word." Translated "preaching" in 1Co.1.18.

Parrhesiazomai (3954), "speak boldly." Translated "preached boldly" in Act.9.27.

Pleroo (4137), "to fulfill." Translated "preached" in Rom.15.19.

Procheirizomai (4400), "previously designated." Translated "preached" in Act.3.20.


I think the manner of preaching can vary since dialegomai (to discuss and dialogue with somebody) is also considered preaching in some translations. I could wish for more specific translations for some of these places in Scripture so that we can picture whether Paul was preaching to someone or discussing with someone.

Here is a link explaining some of the terms translated as preaching or associated with preaching. These verbs are often done by the Apostle Paul or the Apostles but often by others, and in a variety of contexts: http://www.bobyoungresources.com/bible/grkprch.htm


Also, remember that the Apostle Paul tells Timothy, “Do the work of an evangelist.” (2 Tim 4:5).


----------



## Held Fast (Aug 31, 2017)

If preaching, LCBF 26.11 reads 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it. 
( Acts 11:19-21; 1 Peter 4:10, 11 )

However, evangelism in its rawest form, i.e. sharing the good news, is not constrained to preaching in Baptist life and is the expectation of all regenerate to share the good news with their neighbors, either as a testimony of what God has done in their own life, or with some impartation of scripture. In this manner, the gospel is brought to the lost who are not in service on Sunday. Per Spurgeon, all Christians are either missionaries or imposters.

As you follow the Westminster Standards, I recommend this article: http://www.opc.org/os.html?article_id=158 on a different perspective on evangelism. Recognize that not all confessing Christians, to include not all confessing Presbyterians, equate preaching with evangelism, which the author acknowledges.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 31, 2017)

Evangelism is an office; the scriptures show us this:

*Acts 21:8 *

8 And the next _day_ we that were of Paul’s company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was _one_ of the seven; and abode with him. 

*Ephesians 4:11 *

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, hprophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 

*2 Timothy 4:5 *

5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, smake full proof of thy ministry. 

In regard to the terms Trevor cited, all of these terms should be on the foot-heels of a biblical polity and if seen as so, will make better sense. I myself, do not believe that the term 'preach' is ever used apart from this premise.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> I am hoping this post will clarify what the official preaching of the gospel is and how the lost are reached with the gospel.
> 
> Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?



To begin with, you must understand what the means of grace are; For example, prayer, preaching and administration of the sacraments. All of these characteristics are of the ordained alone. Most churches have different gifts. Some fill these gifts in various ways, i.e. missions in other countries, outreaches to nursing homes etc. I am aware of many local churches which do 'beach' outreaches or set up a table at local events here in the Ft. Lauderdale area. In all of these, the pastor is present or at least, an elder who is licensed to preach.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?



This is an important question, Jesse. You made clear in the question itself what you had in mind, though it's not been clearly answered. 

Some of our Reformed brethren would restrict preaching in the sense that you set forth above to the public worship of God on the Lord's Day. However, historically, Presbyterians have not done so, believing that one who is called to preach (as you note, a TE) can and does this in promiscuous gatherings other than the congregation on the Lord's Day.

To be clear, if I, as one duly called and ordained to the gospel ministry, go regularly, with my church's approval and support, to a public square on Fridays and proclaim Jesus Christ, calling all to repent and believe, that is preaching in every proper sense of the word.

Related to this is the preaching on the mission field: the ordained missionary goes to gather (a) church(es). He is preaching from the very beginning under the authority of the church more broadly, though he has as yet no congregation or office-bearers. If he is remote he can examine and baptize the first members and ordain the first elders (and deacons) without any assistance (assuming none is available). He can put together not only a session but a presbytery, working under the authority of his sending church. This is the classic doctrine of missionary as session/presbytery. 

Peace,
Alan

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 2 | Edifying 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

To put it even more precisely, if a TE isn't preaching the Gospel outside of the Sunday worship service, is he being disobedient to his call or is preaching the gospel on Sunday all he is called to do?

**i realize there are differing opinions on this, but I am interested to hear them


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Held Fast said:


> If preaching, LCBF 26.11 reads 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it.
> ( Acts 11:19-21; 1 Peter 4:10, 11 )
> 
> However, evangelism in its rawest form, i.e. sharing the good news, is not constrained to preaching in Baptist life and is the expectation of all regenerate to share the good news with their neighbors, either as a testimony of what God has done in their own life, or with some impartation of scripture. In this manner, the gospel is brought to the lost who are not in service on Sunday. Per Spurgeon, all Christians are either missionaries or imposters.
> ...



In the article he states his position, which I'm sure many of the PB would agree with.

(He defines)"evangelism to be the official proclamation of the eschatological Kingdom of God in Jesus Christ; this task is committed to the visible church (WCF 25.3)

So he is saying that the preachers calling is to the visible church. This sounds great on paper, but it causes a bit of a problem for the non-believer who has never been to a church service.

So if the lost person that works at the gas station I frequent doesn't hear the Gospel from a TE and I don't have he responsibility as a mere born-again Christian, how will he get the message of the gospel?


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Aug 31, 2017)

Jesse:

The first call of a pastor/preacher is to preach (primarily on the Lord's Day) to his congregation. As he has opportunity and occasion (and I do think that he should be pro-active in seeking such), he may proclaim such elsewhere. 

He must, of course, have an open-door to do so (we are not to throw pearl before swine): he cannot stand up in a coffee shop, for example, and start "preaching" to the chagrin of the proprietors and customers. Not only is it rude, but there is no scriptural warrant to do such a thing. The analogy with telling them that there is a fire in the establishment breaks down at this point and I hope that you can see and understand that: God prepares soil and we don't keep sowing ("preaching") when men in the world manifestly reject the gospel offer. 

This is not the same as lawful preaching in a public square in which, though many do not want to hear, some may. Discretion must be exercised, but we never have a call to force the gospel down the throats of those outside the church who don't want to hear (nor in the church, but I am not talking about those in the church). 

And as for you at the gas station, nothing whatsoever keeps you from telling the attendant about eternal life if he is willing to hear you. You are free to do so and please do so. May God richly bless your witness to him!

Peace,
Alan

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Jesse:
> 
> The first call of a pastor/preacher is to preach (primarily on the Lord's Day) to his congregation. As he has opportunity and occasion (and I do think that he should be pro-active in seeking such), he may proclaim such elsewhere.
> 
> ...



Okay good. So you aren't going to stand up in Starbucks and give them the "Men of Athens!" speech. That is probably a good thing.

So you would say that it is good for me to actively promote the gospel to people I encounter. But the caveat is that I should always move them toward the visible church?-- I think this is a good clarification to make.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> I am hoping this post will clarify what the official preaching of the gospel is and how the lost are reached with the gospel.
> 
> Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?


My understanding from the scriptures is that evangelism happens pretty much outside of the church building, while within the saved are trained/built up/equipped for service and ministry.


----------



## Gforce9 (Aug 31, 2017)

Every Lord's Day, I am confronted with the Law of God, have the call to confess my sins, and am "evangelized", having the Gospel proclaimed to me. I don't know how I spent so many years in non-Reformed churches missing out on what God has ordained and blesses His children via the means of grace.......

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Gforce9 said:


> Every Lord's Day, I am confronted with the Law of God, have the call to confess my sins, and am "evangelized", having the Gospel proclaimed to me. I don't know how I spent so many years in non-Reformed churches missing out on what God has ordained and blesses His children via the means of grace.......


Here is the original post with the question: 

"Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?"


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 31, 2017)

"Official"

Yes.


----------



## Stope (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> So you would say that it is good for me to actively promote the gospel to people I encounter. But the caveat is that I should always move them toward the visible church?-- I think this is a good clarification to make.


Parsed well. Excited to read these responses...


----------



## Gforce9 (Aug 31, 2017)

Gforce9 said:


> Every Lord's Day, I am confronted with the Law of God, have the call to confess my sins, and am "evangelized", having the Gospel proclaimed to me. I don't know how I spent so many years in non-Reformed churches missing out on what God has ordained and blesses His children via the means of grace.......





Romans5eight said:


> Here is the original post with the question:
> 
> "Does the official preaching of the gospel take place mainly during worship on Sunday or are TE's required to preach the gospel in other places so the lost (who aren't in worship services) can hear it also?"



Jesse,
I wasn't trying to be snarky nor derail the thread, but looking back, should have added what I will below to clarify. You ask an important question. A few things:

1- The main reason I answered the way I did, is that I think the context of worship on the Lord's Day is the first duty of the minister....From John 21:17 Simon, do you love me? Feed my sheep.....

2- I think the word "evangelism" has been narrowed too much _and_ a whole section of its beneficiaries has been left out with the modern, revivalistic term and definition. Christians need to hear the gospel- over and over and over again. This is a critical element of disciple-making. 

3- If the first duties are being accomplished by a minister, I think he should turn his attention outside the congregation. This is where seeker-sensitive movements have gone off the rails- they have completely failed to make disciples. Too often, they focus on the "evangelism" of the lost, get a "decision", and off to the next potential "convert". Woe to those who hold office and preach a bastardized "gospel" and leave the newborn sheep to fend for themselves.....

4- As brought up in other recent threads, the "threshold" or "decisional" theology is not only poor theology, but has had disastrous results. I believe it was Joshua who brought to clarity some of its dangerous pitfalls.

5- God has promised His presence and blessing in the means of grace. This does not happen on a street corner or in a coffee shop. This alone puts priority on the Lord's Day worship.

As a point of clarity, a Teaching Elder (TE) comes from a two office view held (elder-deacon) by the PCA. The OPC, for example, has a three office view (minister-elder-deacon). Both the "TE" and "minister" are ordained, learned ministers, but it can be confusing to some non-Presbyterian folk in a particular conversation. An "Evangelist" in Presbyterian circles has the same gifting and credentials as TE or minister, but is called to a specific work as Edward articulated somewhere earlier.......

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Gforce9 said:


> Jesse,
> I wasn't trying to be snarky nor derail the thread, but looking back, should have added what I will below to clarify. You ask an important question. A few things:
> 
> 1- The main reason I answered the way I did, is that I think the context of worship on the Lord's Day is the first duty of the minister....From John 21:17 Simon, do you love me? Feed my sheep.....
> ...



So how would you say non-churchgoers should hear the Gospel?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 31, 2017)

in my opinion, there are very few people here in the states that don't know the basics of the gospel message. Additionally, they know well where to find the water-that being the church local.


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Scott Bushey said:


> in my opinion, there are very few people here in the states that don't know the basics of the gospel message. Additionally, they know well where to find the water-that being the church local.


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


>


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)




----------



## BGF (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> So how would you say non-churchgoers should hear the Gospel?


As Dr. Strange mentioned above, you are free to share. Your response was an acceptable summary.


Romans5eight said:


> So you would say that it is good for me to actively promote the gospel to people I encounter. But the caveat is that I should always move them toward the visible church?-- I think this is a good clarification to make.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

BGF said:


> As Dr. Strange mentioned above, you are free to share. Your response was an acceptable summary.


Yes, I realize that--I was replying to Greg and his post specifically.

My point in this line of questioning it for us to think practically about our own spheres of influence and the people we come in contact with who do not know Christ. There are people we see everyday who have not heard the gospel and our pastor isn't going to reach them at church on Sunday. Reaching out to them with the Gospel doesn't diminish the official preaching of the word, it gives people an invitation to knowing God and invites them to join us in the visible church.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 31, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> So how would you say non-churchgoers should hear the Gospel?



They "should" go to where The Gospel is preached. 

May I ask if you believe those who hear the Gospel outside of the proper prescribed person in scripture (Romans 10) saved? In other words, Romans 10 asks how will they believe unless a they are preached to and by those that are sent. The answer is they will not believe, and in my opinion there is no in between answer to what Paul asked.


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Aug 31, 2017)

earl40 said:


> They "should" go to where The Gospel is preached.
> 
> May I ask if you believe those who hear the Gospel outside of the proper prescribed person in scripture (Romans 10) saved? In other words, Romans 10 asks how will they believe unless a they are preached to and by those that are sent. The answer is they will not believe, and in my opinion there is no in between answer to what Paul asked.



I believe that a person is saved when they are regenerated by the Spirit. This isn't directly always the result of a TE preaching. For example, infants. 

I know that it makes sense to you for non-believers to simply go to church on Sunday and hear the gospel. It seems like to me Sunday worship is primarily for believers who willingly attend. I don't know why an unregenerate person would wake up early and drive to a church service to hear the gospel preached. I don't think you have a good case here. And Romans 10 isn't a silver bullet argument against Christians telling others about Christ.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 31, 2017)

Jesse,
The videos do not destroy my premise; America is by and large a Christian nation-that being, most people have been steeped in the ideas what the church teaches about Christ. During the winter solstice, do your own research and u will see that most know that Christ is at the center of our theology. Using terms like 'gospel' are difficult for most. But asking who Christ is and why he died is helpful.

Now I did not say this to imply one should not share-all of us are part and parcel with the commission, only that even the re[probates know that Christ is found, mainly, in the local setting.

The portion of the passage in matt 18 that tells us that 'where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst', is a corporate based statement. When the organized body meets every Lord's day, Christ is in the midst of the bride in ways that He is not otherwise.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Aug 31, 2017)

I believe the Church has the responsibility to take the Gospel to every lost person in the world. This does not mean every single member of the Church has the responsibility to take the Gospel to each and every lost member in the world. However, if enough people opt-out and say that this is not their job, then the expansion of the Gospel will certainly take a lot longer to reach every tongue, tribe, and nation. 

In World War II it was said that "America is at war" - meaning the whole nation was involved in the struggle. Even though only a minority of its men went overseas to fight in the war, it was said that the nation as a whole was at war. Citizens were expected to pray for the troops, ration some items, and support the troops, if not become a troop. 

The same with the Church. The Church has been given a Great Commission. This Commission was given to the Church as a whole and not merely those first apostles. Every member of the Church is somehow responsible to do his part. Not all have the same parts. But all are to do their own individual part. 

The elderly Christian may pray for the lost or give towards the ministry. The housewife may teach her children and speak to her neighbors when appropriate. The minister is to both preach to his own congregation as well as do the work of an evangelist.

This is very distressing to me, but some make it a habit on the Puritanboard to always remind laymen that they have no obligation to evangelize. Some seem to actively dissuade people from witnessing. 

However, every Christian is to be a witness. I Peter 2:9 says the following of EVERY Christian, "But ye _are_ a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light..." 

So...yes...I would like to strongly assert that EVERY Christian does, indeed, have obligations towards the evangelization of the entire world. Accuse me of "guilting others" if you will...but every single believer is part of the Great Commission, every single believer is to be prepared to give an answer, every single believer is to shew forth praises wherever they go, to speak of Christ to his neighbor, to be a witness, and to minister grace to others. This does not mean that every Christian must evangelize everyone they meet on every occasion, but it does mean that we are not "off-the-hook" or under no obligation. We are to make our light shine. That sounds like a command to me...to every Christian.

In the history of the church I would assert that it was not the formal preaching of the Word which brought in millions to the gospel, but the daily witness and conversations with other Christians. Yes, those people ended up in a church, but only after some contact outside of the church with laypersons and "normal" Christians. 

This has been an unhealthy trend on the PB for years, the quick reminder often given to shocked new posters that we are not to evangelize unless we are called to evangelize. And all the new posters mean by "evangelism" is to "share the Gospel" and they do not mean to usurp some church office. I get that we want to guard the high offices of the church...but we shouldn't do so by telling Christians to believe that they are okay living as Christians when they are not praying or giving towards the completion of the Great Commission and they remain but a silent witness always and everywhere before a lost world. A witness, after all, is to be seen and heard.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Sep 1, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> So how would you say non-churchgoers should hear the Gospel?


Is this a question solely focused upon a regenerative event or being "saved"?

_Extra ecclesiam nulla salus_.

WCF Chapter 25

_Section 2_
The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; (1 Cor. 1:2, 1 Cor. 12:12-13, Ps. 2:8, Rev. 7:9, Rom. 15:9-12) and of their children: (1 Cor. 7:14, Acts 2:39, Ezek. 16:20-21, Rom. 11:16, Gen. 3:15, Gen. 17:7) and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, (Matt. 13:47, Isa. 9:7) the house and family of God, (Eph. 2:19, Eph. 3:15) *out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation*. (Acts 2:47)

But because it is now our intention to discuss the visible church, let us learn even from the simple title “mother” how useful, indeed how necessary, it is that we should know her. For there is no other way to enter into life unless this mother conceive us in her womb, give us birth, nourish us at her breast, and lastly, unless she keep us under her care and guidance until, putting off mortal flesh, we become like the angels [Matthew 22:30].​
Our weakness does not allow us to be dismissed from her school until we have been pupils all our lives. Furthermore, away from her bosom one cannot hope for any forgiveness of sins or any salvation, as Isaiah [Isaiah 37:32] and Joel [Joel 2:32] testify. Ezekiel agrees with them when he declares that those whom God rejects from heavenly life will not be enrolled among God’s people [Ezekiel 13:9].​
On the other hand, those who turn to the cultivation of true godliness are said to inscribe their names among the citizens of Jerusalem [cf. Isaiah 56:5; Psalm 87:6]. For this reason, it is said in another psalm: “_Remember me, O Jehovah, with favor toward thy people; visit me with salvation: that I may see the well-doing of thy chosen ones, that I may rejoice in the joy of thy nation, that I may be glad with thine inheritance_” [Psalm 106:4-5 p.; cf. Psalm 105:4, Vg., etc.]. By these words God’s fatherly favor and the especial witness of spiritual life are limited to his flock, so that it is always disastrous to leave the church.
Src: _Institutes of the Christian Religion_, Vol. 2, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, reprinted 1977), Book IV.I.4, page 1016.​


----------



## jw (Sep 1, 2017)

Pergamum said:


> This has been an unhealthy trend on the PB for years, the quick reminder often given to shocked new posters that we are not to evangelize unless we are called to evangelize. And all the new posters mean by "evangelism" is to "share the Gospel" and they do not mean to usurp some church office. I get that we want to guard the high offices of the church...but we shouldn't do so by telling Christians to believe that they are okay living as Christians when they are not praying or giving towards the completion of the Great Commission and they remain but a silent witness always and everywhere before a lost world. A witness, after all, is to be seen and heard.



Do not light a match in here, or the straw men may catch fire (meant light-heartedly)

I am confident and hopeful that the misrepresentation/misapprehension of the position espoused pertaining to biblical evangelism is not purposeful and surely is truly _only_ a misapprehension. Perhaps the position needs to be better stated.

There may be regular reminders from folks as how properly to define _evangelism_, and certainly the frequency of that reminder may be irksome to some and -perhaps- could stand to be examined and discussed. However, I simply do no recall anyone seeking "to guard the high offices of the church . . . by telling Christians to believe that they are okay living as Christians when they are not praying or giving towards the completion of the Great Commission and they remain but a silent witness always and everywhere before a lost world."

If I were to see that asserted, I would certainly denounce it as very wrong and unbiblical advice. Those who have asserted that "evangelism" is something unique to office bearers in the church have also gone record as saying that every Christian should have an answer for the hope that they have, that they should be ready and willing to give a word in season to those who need it, that they should be forward to speak about the great things Christ has done for them, so on, so forth. This has mostly been about proper definitions and terminology, so as to clear up for folks their duty and -perhaps- take off some undue pressure they've had according to their own place and station.

Our brother, Scott Bushey, has -several times, in different threads- made the very point that this is heavily about differing definitions, and not so much practice (although, there _are_ differences in practice, and they're good to be discussed). But definitions matter, and so do concepts like _kingdom, order, station, calling, polity_, and _authority_. These are the points being sought for clarification. I have stayed away from a few of these other newer related threads because they're not getting anywhere without definitions agreed upon upfront in such a way as to be conducive for further discussion. It is also regularly asserted that the position some of us hold is represented as telling church members not to mention Christ, or Scripture, or forgiveness, etc. as if we believe those things not to be every Christian's purview.

I do not believe such. I doubt Scott believes such. I think Pastor Strange has provided a great service in his expressions of the position.

_If_ somone has asserted such things before mentioned, then those things should explicitly be quoted and dealt with, but to assert that we say Christians ought simply to be quiet is not accurate, just as calling the position you've put forward ecclesiastical Bretherenism would be wildly inaccurate.

Sincerely and Brotherly,

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Sep 1, 2017)

Joshua said:


> Do not light a match in here, or the straw men may catch fire (meant light-heartedly)
> 
> I am confident and hopeful that the misrepresentation/misapprehension of the position espoused pertaining to biblical evangelism is not purposeful and surely is truly _only_ a misapprehension. Perhaps the position needs to be better stated.
> 
> ...



I'm glad we all agree that we should be actively sharing the gospel with the unchurched in some way. Or at least inviting them to church to hear the gospel preached if that is your conviction.

It would be encouraging to hear some of the interactions some of you have. In a different thread-- in the future.

"And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works,
not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near."
Hebrews 10:24-25


----------



## earl40 (Sep 1, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> I know that it makes sense to you for non-believers to simply go to church on Sunday and hear the gospel. And Romans 10 isn't a silver bullet argument against Christians telling others about Christ.



I do indeed think it makes sense for non-believers to simply go to church on Sunday and hear the gospel. Have seen the results of such, though not quite as many as those who profess to believe and do not attend church, and we both know how many of those people are merely professors and not believers . Also I never said we laypersons may not tell people about Jesus.  Romans 10 in my opinion is a "silver bullet" question (yes or no answer) to how people are saved.


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Sep 1, 2017)

earl40 said:


> I never said we laypersons may not tell people about Jesus.  Romans 10 in my opinion is a "silver bullet" question (yes or no answer) to how people are saved.



I honestly have never heard the view that a person cannot be regenerated apart from the preaching ministry.

My belief has been that we are saved by hearing the word which can come in the form of reading scripture or hearing the gospel from a parent or friend for example.

When Paul asks how they can believe if they don't hear, I think this applies to my question. How can lost people believe if they don't hear the message? The Romans didn't have radio or internet, so unless someone physically walked to where the lost were they cannot hear the message of the gospel. It's incumbent on the hearing of the message, not on the one that delivers it.


----------



## earl40 (Sep 1, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> I honestly have never heard the view that a person cannot be regenerated apart from the preaching ministry..



Well now you have heard how people are saved and Romans 10 describes who and how it is done. PS. I used to incorrectly assume as you do, and many reformed believe as you do.




Romans5eight said:


> My belief has been that we are saved by hearing the word which can come in the form of reading scripture or hearing the gospel from a parent or friend for example.



Romans 10 is a silver bullet that can cure such.



Romans5eight said:


> When Paul asks how they can believe if they don't hear, I think this applies to my question. How can lost people believe if they don't hear the message? The Romans didn't have radio or internet, so unless someone physically walks to where the lost were they cannot hear the message of the gospel. It's incumbent on the hearing of the message, not on the one that delivers it.



Romans 10 once again says who is "sent", and this is backed up by The Great Commission, which shows who is "sent" forth (ordained officers) to make disciples and baptize. You and I have duties and those duties do not include making disciples and baptizing.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Sep 1, 2017)

earl40 said:


> Well now you have heard how people are saved and Romans 10 describes who and how it is done. PS. I used to incorrectly assume as you do, and many reformed believe as you do.





> Romans 10 once again says who is "sent", and this is backed up by The Great Commission, which shows who is "sent" forth (ordained officers) to make disciples and baptize. You and I have duties and those duties do not include making disciples and baptizing.



To be accurate, Rom's 10 describes how men are converted. Conversion is not regeneration and regeneration is not conversion. Regeneration is the monergistic work of God that occurs at God's timing, apart from nothing. It is a work of God alone and happens like a blowing wind-almost randomly. See John 3 and how Jesus equates it with the wind and how nobody knows where it comes from or where it blows. This is considered the inward call of God.

Earls 2nd quote is accurate. The preacher administering the means of grace is the outward call and causes the inward call to be effectual in that the data the regenerated person now has and has assented to these biblical facts to rise to the place where the person is now given faith and repentance and that person agrees with, accepts, receives these truths.

* I will offer one caveat: God does, according to His good pleasure, regenerate people at the same time the outward call of God is given to regenerate men at that time, often. But He is not bound to that rule, per se. It does happen indiscriminately, earlier, at times as well.

Wisdom does not save (or does it?)
http://www.semperreformanda.com/2015/03/4398/


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Sep 1, 2017)

Romans5eight said:


> I honestly have never heard the view that a person cannot be regenerated apart from the preaching ministry.
> 
> My belief has been that we are saved by hearing the word which can come in the form of reading scripture or hearing the gospel from a parent or friend for example.



God is free to work as He chooses, as WCF 5.3 affirms: "God, in his ordinary providence, maketh use of means, yet is free to work without, above, and against them, at his pleasure."

Since in His ordinary providence, however, he makes use of means, it is proper to ask by what means does he usually convert, i.e., work faith and repentance in those that He is pleased to work? And the answer is the preaching of the Word (WCF 14.1).

I would urge you to look most closely at WLC 155-160, which clearly addresses much of this discussion. WLC 155 teaches that the Spirit makes the reading, "but especially the preaching," of the Word effectual in the conversion of God's elect. WLC 160 even speaks of receiving the truth preached as the Word of God, with the proof text being I Thessalonians 2:13.

Since God has appointed preaching for this purpose, we should always endeavor to bring all that we can under such means. My point in all of my replies is that laymen may do more than bring others under the preaching if they are so gifted and led: they may speak to them directly of the gospel, even as you purpose to do with the gas station attendant. However, they may never do less than this. Inviting to church is a minimum, not an addition.

Speak of Christ all that you are able to and as the Lord leads you: that never replaces preaching. We do need to be urging interested auditors to attend upon the means of grace. Maybe it starts with an outreach Bible study that the church is holding, but, yes, the goal is to get them into church and under the ministry of the Word, without which there is little long-term hope for any such persons.

Again, do more than invite to church if opportunity presents, but never do less than that.

Peace,
Alan

Reactions: Like 2 | Edifying 1 | Amen 1


----------



## Deleted member 7239 (Sep 1, 2017)

Thank you all for your time and thoughtful responses. I will take all of them to heart. You are all an encouragement to me, even the ones I disagree with. 

"And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works,
not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near."
Hebrews 10:24-25


----------



## Held Fast (Sep 1, 2017)

Jesse, there is a school of thought that in addition to the spirits work of regeneration to prepare a heart to receive the gospel, there is a work of the spirit in the proclamation of the gospel, and unless both works are present, conversion does not occur. Having now worked in a multi-denomination setting, I see that that school is the smallest in Christianity today. A larger school would simply say that the spirits work is in regeneration, but the seed delivered even by a neighbor simply giving a testimony of what the Lord has done, can take root and conversion occur. The still larger school is arminian, sadly, and it can look like chaotic unfettered seed scattering willy nilly by everyone everywhere with no thought to the work of the spirit. It is against that larger school, and its influence on the confessing church particularly in the 70's and 80's, that many within confessional life have pulled back into that first school of thought. I personally have no issue with the second, as in it conversion is still the Lord's work, and not the work of man.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser (Sep 2, 2017)

Held Fast said:


> Jesse, there is a school of thought that in addition to the spirits work of regeneration to prepare a heart to receive the gospel, there is a work of the spirit in the proclamation of the gospel, and unless both works are present, conversion does not occur. Having now worked in a multi-denomination setting, I see that that school is the smallest in Christianity today. A larger school would simply say that the spirits work is in regeneration, but the seed delivered even by a neighbor simply giving a testimony of what the Lord has done, can take root and conversion occur. The still larger school is arminian, sadly, and it can look like chaotic unfettered seed scattering willy nilly by everyone everywhere with no thought to the work of the spirit. It is against that larger school, and its influence on the confessing church particularly in the 70's and 80's, that many within confessional life have pulled back into that first school of thought. I personally have no issue with the second, as in it conversion is still the Lord's work, and not the work of man.


Heard it stated that in real conversion, there are always 3 parts present. The scriptures, the person giving them forth, and the Holy Spirit enabling/quickening the sinner to now receive Jesus and get saved.


----------

