Becoming a disciple of Jesus just got a lot easier, thanks to your cell phone.
I’m on the record about the public invitation or “altar call,” as revivalists like to call here. (Here, here, and here.)
I don’t like it. Why? Read the posts, but for now, let’s look at one reason: You walk the aisle, you can say you’re a Christian. In most revivalistic contexts, it’s strongly implied- or absolutely assumed- that walking forward makes you a Christian.
Aisle walking, altar call invitationalism replaced baptism in the revivalistic tradition as the visible proclamation of personal faith in Christ. It also had the advantage of being non-negotiable in the mind of many “converts.” Before you said a word to anyone, you’d already “walked the aisle.” If you evangelist had done his job, “walking forward” at that meeting was all the assurance you would need for the rest of your life.
The “sinners prayer,” and “praying with someone” were additional revivalist sacraments, but the key was to walk forward. It was letting go and going to Jesus. “I have decided to follow Jesus. Well, actually, I’ve decided to walk forward. We’ll see how it goes after that.”
I’ve heard it for years: “Come to Jesus….here at the front.” In a Catholic mass, that makes sense. Not in an evangelical setting. We don’t have Jesus “up front” for you to come up and “get.”
And so, at least in my denomination and many other revivalistic traditions, millions and millions of people came to believe they had “accepted Christ” because they had done something. The “sacrament of the aisle walk” was efficacious and easy.
Really, really easy.
So I’ve heard it a thousand times. “I came forward at camp, so I’m a Christian.”
Could we make it worse? What kind of question is that?
Yes, we can make it worse. Read the following description by Lexington Herald-Leader CCM reviewer Rich Copley; a description of what replaced the “aisle walk” at a recent CCM concert in Lexington.
Then evangelist —- —– took the stage to deliver a message and a high-tech take on the invitation for people to commit to the Christian faith. No walking forward to Just As I Am, Without One Plea here. Winter Jam goers were told to text “Tony†to 38714, and they would receive a text with more information about where to go for information. Winter Jam organizers estimated 2,500 people responded to that invitation Saturday night.
I should have seen it coming. I’m almost embarrassed that I didn’t predict it, but I’m really not part of the “texting” generation, so I was asleep at the wheel.
Will churches be far behind? Will denominations be able to resist a new way to register “decisions” for Jesus? Will it be long before I hear this from a teenager: “Well, I texted the preacher at Winter Jam, so yeah, I’m a Christian.”
It’s all so easy. So virtual. So convenient.
And we’ll be hearing stories about how the Holy Spirit used it, for which we should all rejoice. God is amazingly generous with his grace.
Don’t get me wrong. The invitation can be combined with the Gospel rightly proclaimed, and in that case texting is no worse than any other invitation, but all experienced evangelistic preachers know that in the mind of the person walking forward/texting, the wrong assumptions persist no matter how clear you’ve been that this does not save. It’s a big risk, and one that I avoid unless forced to use it.
But when it’s time to say what I think in public or on this blog, I’m going to say what I’ve been saying to revivalists for 8 years: anything a person DOES that becomes their confidence is false assurance. Christ is our assurance. Period. You are not saved by texting, aisle walking, sitting in church or preaching to stadiums. You are saved by sola fide, faith alone, simple faith, the faith of a child. You are saved by Christ, by grace and through faith.
You didn’t need to text anyone. You just needed to call upon Jesus. “Lord, have mercy.” In faith.
Then, as a disciple who has placed his/her faith in Jesus alone, you are baptized in the name of the Trinity. While God knows the moment of your conversion when no one else does (even you), your baptism represents, for the church and the world, the moment of crossing the line into the new creation.
Why is baptism not a work that we do? Because water can’t save, but Christ in the Gospel does. A baptism isn’t water. It’s the Gospel in water.
Jesus only left two outward rituals. Two. And one of them is about being able to say you are a Christian by saying “As a believer, I was baptized.”
Not, “I texted Tony” or “I prayed with the preacher” or “I came forward at camp.”
So the battle goes on. Evangelicals find a new technology and they appropriate it without thinking what they are doing to the faith once delivered. With their innovations, from the invitation itself to texting your decisions, they deconstruct the faith itself in the name of evangelism.
The entrepreneurialism of evangelicals has always been a missional strength, but it is an impulse that must be checked and critiqued, restrained and reconsidered. The use of technology can enrich the faith or erase the faith. A new generation of evangelicals taken with the possibilities of techno-evangelism but not willing to be more faithful to scripture than to the spirit of innovation will wreak further dilution and delusion upon a movement that is already as insubstantial as vapor.
Call me a Luddite. I really don’t care. Technology and evangelistic methodology are a potent mix. Playing with ways to get more decisions is another way to insure that many of those decisions are fake.
Now…..if we can just make a baptism app for Facebook. How does this sound? Instead of “I see that hand…,” “I see that Tweet…..”
[One note about comments: I will not post ANY denominational baptism debate comments. This post is an in-house, evangelical discussion, not a discussion of credobaptism vs paedobaptism. Thanks.]
I had a few paragraphs to post then thought, huh, I just reiterated everything you said. NO point posting but good job on the assessment.
Txt decisions is the best solution we have to connect with a tech generation, seriously it is. It just happens to be coupled with a modern consumer model of church……
Just to clarify, txt decisions are the best solution within the modern consumer model of church, not the best solution to connect with a tech generation
And texting just makes it easier to be an isolated Christian. Which I don’t think can/should be done.
I am astounded, though like you, I feel I shouldn’t be surprised. It seems so obvious.
Like you, I have serious reservations about altar calls themselves, though I had never considered their status as a sacramental stand-in for baptism. The manipulation that goes into “winning souls” in this context, not to mention the physical shoving that I’ve experienced in attempts to see people “slain in the Spirit” grates on me.
But with an attitude that encourages altar call conversions, why not accept text messages? It adds to the tally the evangelist can claim, it encourages everyone that the Spirit of God is moving among our youth, and it allows people to bypass embarrassment and make their conversion more personal and just “to the Lord.”
What would a texted altar call look like anyway? I M 2 folo J now. J, ur gr8, u make me ur ):-)
When the decisions are legitimate, that’s wonderful. I just it were clearer what we were responding to, and that we followed a biblical model, like the one set by Jesus and the Apostles.
If some of today’s biggest names in preaching are inviting the congregation to text their questions during the sermon, could this have been that far behind?
Michael,
What happens when the texting evangelist gets decision spam? Maybe we could have one of those letter verification boxes at each text-call. Don’t want any savebots getting in on the salvation action.
Combining texting with being slain in the spirit sounds absolutely hilarious though. I always feel like that T-9 Word suggestion thing is trying to communicate something to me as it is; it would only make sense if I were trying to text God and had some kind of seizure. In fact, I welcome this and any other dumb fusions of technology and spiritual enthusiasm to follow – holler at me when we start doing the Mass in PERL.
Headless Unicorn Guy’s new Salvation-thriller novella series is going to blow up with this crowd. I can see it now:
Coming in 2010 from Tyndale House: what if the world ended tomorrow? Entertainment blogger JockSanchez never thought he’d have to ask himself that question, but with planes dropping out of the sky, the strange disappearance of the world’s bees and a Dark Omen moving into the White House, he finds himself forced to consider the unthinkable when an strange encounter with a bum on the New York City streets rattles his icy rationality. Things only get weirder when suddenly, the Internet goes offline, plunging the world into chaos as people struggle to regain contact with their loved ones and acquire free music. As networks on either sides of the netsplits struggle to reconnect, sysadmins can’t help but notice the absence of hundreds of users – ‘ghosts’ who are logged on, but who’ve gone mysteriously silent. Are they there, or are they “AFK”?
Follow JockSanchez as he struggles to piece together a web of conspiracies involving the dinosaurs, Charles Babbage and the shadowy hand of the Illuminati. Will he discover the Reason for Living before time Runs Out?
From the people who brought you the acclaimed “Left Behind” series: AFK.
How ironic, as I touched on this subject this morning. I wish I had known about the texting to illustrate further how we cheapen and “dumb-down” the gospel. As long as we pray the prayer, text the preacher, or whatever, we have our ticket to heaven and our “eternal fire insurance.” What else matters? Why worry about spiritual growth, injustice, sanctification, and the like? Why be concerned about being transformed into a new creation in Christ? So many who walk the aisle, or now text the preacher, can go on being shallow jerks because they’ve prayed the prayer by whatever means. We’ve really come a long way, haven’t we? And we wonder why more and more Americans are listing “none” as their religious preference. Wonder if you can text “none?” to join?
Interesting stuff. I think when it comes to the sola fide we need to recongize that faith and actions should go hand in hand. The action of a prayer can be done with or without faith. The action of baptism can be done with or without faith. The action of going forward can be done with or without faith… and I guess the same would apply to the action of texting.
True faith is always accompanied with some sort of actions… these are just the easy beginning actions… then we need to follow Christ.
>…True faith is always accompanied with some sort of actions… these are just the easy beginning actions… then we need to follow Christ.
I have to disagree somewhat, though I understand your point. A lifetime working with young people and watching the results of invitationalism tells me there is danger in anything other than a zealous devotion to faith alone, especially in the use of the unbiblical “altar call.”
True faith is evidenced by actions, but it isn’t accompanied by any action in its essence as faith. It rests on Christ alone and does nothing as faith. Faith is living, and will confess, repent, obey, etc. (imperfectly and in time) but at its simplest, it is resting, not working.
Faith as described in Gen 15:6 is believing God and that is it. All that Abraham did evidenced his faith.
An “accompanying action” gives an opportunity for a false assurance based on what was done. Satan can say “Well you prayed the prayer.” Sinners should be told to believe the Gospel and nothing else. No matter how small or encouraging the something else is, it will become assurance and then will be repeated over and over in times of doubt.
Those whom Paul said were Christians in I Cor 15 did nothing but hear and receive the message. Their actions thereafter were evidence of faith.
when i read the “text tony” part my heart sank. not because of the inherent discussion of texting versus aisle walking, but because i knew exactly which tony they were texting, since my home church has many ties to winter jam.
i’ve heard tony numerous times. the lowest moment for me was a summer camp for high schoolers where i was a counselor because i taught sunday school. he pulled one of your favorites iMonk, obliterating high schoolers faith in Jesus and making them doubt every step of their Christian journey thus far. at the end of the sermon, kids were challenged to make a real, sincere profession of faith this time if they had been faking it all along. as a counselor i was asked to pray with kids. ironically i was paired up with a kid i knew very well because i dated his older sister for a quite a while and was very close to her family. i refused to go through a sinner’s prayer with him. i simply told him that he knew the gospel intellectually. there was no need for me to go through any presentation of it. he had been on mission trips and different outreach events. i told him to go back to his room and spend some time alone with God on his own. if he came to the conclusion that he wasn’t saved and that he needed to ask God for forgiveness, then to do so. but regardless and above all, he should cling to Christ for his salvation in what He has already done in the cross and empty tomb. i told him whether he prayed another sinner’s prayer was up to him and none of my business, but the important thing was to have faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus on his behalf.
if you remember the scene from the movie “luther”, the poor, beggar mother with a sick child approaches luther with an indulgence in hand purchased for her daughter. luther takes the paper and crumples it telling her “it’s just paper. it’s worthless.” he then takes his cross necklace off and gives it to her, and tells her to “cling to Christ” for her sake and her daughters. that scene in the movie personifies perfectly how i felt in that moment that day.
Texting a question in a big hall on a Sunday night is a far cry and quite different from contacting tony for salvation.
Talk about phoning it in!
I remember years ago ,as pulpit supply, being told that my stipend check was dependent on an altar call.
Every week for the 8 weeks I served there I faithfully gave an Altar call to the same twelve people, not out of fear for my little check, but respect for their worship culture. It just wasn’t church without the call. I still plead for people to Repent and Believe, but no formal altar call.
Sola fide, Imonk. Any add-on can confuse.
Texting…walking….It really doesn’t matter to me. If one person out of the 12,000+ actually made a decision to follow Christ, the entire show was worth the cost in time, sweat, and money. I grew up in the days of Billy Graham crusades and see little difference in people walking forward because their friends did and being insincere or people texting for some reason that may elude them at the time. Either way, there is more ‘heart-work’ to be done and I pray that these little steps will be in the right direction and eventually lead to the cross.
>…If one person out of the 12,000+ actually made a decision to follow Christ, the entire show was worth the cost in time, sweat, and money.
I don’t think anyone is disputing the awesomeness of someone coming to faith.
I would never argue that any commitment to Christ can be assessed on a cost basis. Jesus paid it all. But what about Christian stewardship?
A church pays $10k to bring in a band to pay for its youth group to have a concert.
Are they obligated to ask what the $10k could do in various contexts? Church planting? Salary for a national? Funding a Wycliffe translator? Or does the “Any amount is worth it for any kind of decision” reflect a particularly American, consumeristic kind of logic?
I’m just curious. I don’t see why concepts of stewardship don’t apply here. Jesus refused to do miracles on strategic occasions. Was that a kind of stewardship?
peace
ms
Also— I might add because of some of the previous comments: The texting at WinterJam (as I understood it from the upper arena) was so that the sponsors could contact those who made a decision and provide them with additional materials to get started on their walk with Jesus, not simply for a head count.
I’m sure many good things could be done with the text decisions. No argument. But are evangelicals going to forever say “whatever we do is OK, because it’s evangelistic?”
Everything we do- good, bad and otherwise- is justified by someone as evangelism. The whole enterprise of having siuburban kids come to Rupp and pay who knows what for a concert is part of the evangelical assumption that there’s no connection between anything they do and how they do it.
The fact is, there IS a connection between what we do and how we do it, and it’s at that connection we have to have the courage as a movement to critique ourselves.
I’m happy for anyone who came to Christ, but I can’t buy this as Biblical evangelism. Sorry. That’s my hang up.
peace
ms
I would not attempt to argue about the stewardship issue. Perhaps I am too simplistic but I believe that if a church, through trusted leaders who earnestly seek God’s guidance, feels that they are to bring in a band at 10K for a performance, then that IS the right step, whether it APPEARS to make sense or not. (I am assuming a group of leaders who are constantly assessing their own motives and asking God for the next step in their church community)
I appreciate your view on that as it pertains to your own community. My role in the Kingdom seems to be to plead with us to examine the intersection of evangelical culture with the Kingdom values of Jesus. If I can picture Jesus doing it (and can see that plainly in scripture,) then I’m all for it. But if not, then I have to part ways.
I’d have the same thing to say about spending 100,000k on putting an American missionary on the field when a few thousand can equip national for years.
thanks for the comments.
peace
ms
“The whole enterprise of having suburban kids come to Rupp and pay who knows what for a concert is part of the evangelical assumption that there’s no connection between anything they do and how they do it.”
I guess that’s where I, as a parent, have to parent.
“I’m happy for anyone who came to Christ, but I can’t buy this as Biblical evangelism. Sorry. That’s my hang up.”
Understand.
This is America. I have a PhD in a technical field, and the unstated marching order was, “We do because we can.” It’s a technocracy, so all technology must be good, and God must be a technocrat, too. Bring me another powerpoint sermon, please.
As a parent who raised two, I understand the anxiety. But here’s the IMonk for you: I don’t see those events producing disciples. (And I went to Ichthus 18 times and I’m going to Cornerstone for the second time this year.) Forming a person spiritually is a matter of Jesus-shaped experiences, and if the New Testament is our guide, then those experiences are more about serving people and crossing cultures with the Gospel than bringing the dominant culture onto our turf in a Christianized version.
But the kids had a good time and learned that some Jesus followers can make some great music. That’s valuable too.
Both my kids bailed on CCM after I had devoted years to it. Both are serious adult Christ followers, but not the standard evangelical types. And I’m glad, because I think they will last out what is going to happen to a lot of evangelicalism in the next 20-30 years.
peace
ms
The problem with the technocracy is that it is all head and no heart, so is like unto gnosticism. It’s why lawyers flourish, because they like to argue words and skip over justice. Michael, you teach English, you know that Walter Scott, Shakespeare, Dickens–they would hate the heartless, ruthless, merciless technocracy.
That is why I am a neo-Luddite.
Imonk,
I would love to hear your take on the following scenario because you have so much experience with young people. I was a born and bred baptist. I was raised a pastor’s kid in a very independant baptist setting. Trust me there are many things done wrong there (as many of you know) but it was impossible for me in that setting to grow up and not have a clear idea of the gospel message. I was converted young and discipled in most cases well.
Fast forward.
As an older youth I finally attended SuperWow (a georgia baptist youth camp on the beach) one year with a good friend. I had my indie radar going already b/c I was suspicious of CCM anyway, but I caught on to something really strange.
The whole week it seemed like kids were guilted. Guilted about everything. I mean I was 15 and I could pick up on it. All these kids were made to feel all week that they had been imposter Christians. That they were not radically changed so their professions were false. It all seemed to be done with the intent to get youth to make a new profession.
Imonk here is my question for you. Have you seen this? The number one subject, if that is the right word, that was used to guilt these kids was sex. It was everywhere. They brought in a couple who had never kissed before marriage etc. They constantly went on about intimate relationships. Basically as kids we were told that if we had done anything more than hold hands, then we must not be really radically changed and thereby must need to be saved.
It was criminal really in my opinion.
I still see it now. The public school where I work is papered with flyers about True Love Waits rallies every year. I’m not saying that a message about what is Godly teaching on marriage is not okay, but doesn’t it seem that many times the issue is used to exploit young people’s emotions?
Austin:
Wow. I just don’t have time to say it all….but here’s the high points.
1. Revivalistic evangelism- esp in the SBC- is eaten up with people who are determined to destroy the assurance of everyone. I’ve watched this my entire life. From “Are you sure….” to “Have you totally surrendered?” and on and on. Guilt. Legalism. Moralism. Guilt. Manipulation. Using college kids and emotional manipulation specialists to get people to say they are REALLY REALLY REALLY gettin’ saved this time. It’s how the whole game works.
It’s those abuses that brought me into the Founder’s movement and the reformation Gospel. There I found a Biblical model of evangelism, dependence on the Holy Spirit and no desire to get people resaved but to teach the truths of justification and sanctification.
In fairness, I found that the Reformed ranks were full of a lot of people who had declared war on assurance, and that’s when I really went to Luther and became a convinced Lutheran on these matters. I think a lot of Reformed brothers get this right, but whether it is revivalists undermining assurance or Truly Reformed making you question your salvation over one sin, it’s vital we put the emphasis on what was done OUTSIDE of us. Not IN US.
Go to the IM essays tab.
http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/B/broken.html
http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/R/revival.html
http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/G/grace.html
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-010108-losing-the-reformation-treasure-of-a-christ-centered-assurance-of-salvation
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/god%e2%80%99s-sovereignty-in-lutheranism-an-interview-with-josh-strodtbeck-3-assurance
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/lost-false-or-real-a-closer-look-at-assurance
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/rebaptism-where-to-from-here
I’m actually thinking about working at a Camp this summer, but after seeing this I’m not so sure I want to start applying this coming week after all. I might go for a summer internship at a church instead. I all for getting kids to re-dedicate their lives to God, but convincing them they weren’t saved to begin with? I might be a bit sceptical; but that seems to me as if quite a few camps out there are more interested in head-counts than genuine life-changing discipleship.
Wow. I can definitely see how they thought this was a good idea…but gosh, what an awful idea. Thanks for posting this.
You know Michael, this is an interesting post (read the others on this too) because it brought to mind my own experiences as a youth in a SBC church and all through my life since then (45yoa now)and I remember so many times going to the youth conferences (Nashville – Vanderbilt Gym) and hearing those same things and feeling as though there was no hope. It seemed I couln’t pray enough, walk the aisle enough, take the pastor’s hand enough etc. The same was true on church youth retreats – we were constanatly told how we needed to get our life straight and to be really sure that we had made a “real decision” that we were really saved. As an adult I’ve have literally suffered to the point of near debilating depression at times over the issue of assurance and I’m quite certain much of it was due to being told, basically, that I was not – had never been really saved unless I did…… __________________ fill in the blank. I, generally, don’t respond to altar calls – if I need to do business with God, and I do often, I take care of it before I get there or after church at home. Yes, I pray at church and speak with God there but the really serious things that need addressing happen, generally, outside of the Sunday services.
Additionally, every evangalist that I’ve ever heard from our SBC tradition uses just this same thing not only with youth but with adults. Think Baily Smith, J Harold Smith for example – go though those sevices and you’ll come out assured of one that and that is that there is and you have no assurance because you’ve (I’ve) never been truly saved anyway. J H Smith has gone on but I think Baily is still at it and that’s not to say they are (were) bad people – they are just continuing the “tradition” if you will. This is where tradition can be bad if you get my drift on this.
Thanks for the post – I still have my struggles with this to this day and I’ve allowed other things in that should not have been in my life over the years because of the confusion but I’m slowly, but surely, working through it with God’s help.
Thanks again.
The Guy from Knoxville
iMonk -
A similar action today is getting a text from a particular celebrity preacher with a ‘word of encouragement’ for the day. Getting your daily devotional through a 3 or 4 sentence text message. It is quite shallow, as we know. Though, as someone did point out, one or a few might actually come to Christ through these mass evangelistic concerts, but this practice does not lay ground for true discipleship, as you rightly state.
We are part of the ‘microwave generation’. The microwave was invented to have our food cooked faster (3 minutes or less), but we stand at the microwave impatiently wanting it to hurry. Our spirituality has taken the same the same hit. We want Jesus in 3 minutes or less. It is truly hurting us.
Scott and Michael,
I just noticed a connection between this posting and the one on silence. You can’t hurry silence and meditation.(sp). That has to grow slowly, especially at first. Texting is instant. Don’t know what it means, though.
Off topic FYI, Scott you might be interested to know how the microwave cookery was discovered. Some scientists were trying micowaves as a communication method, and noticed that a nearby chocolate bar was melted. That led them to using them to heat food.
The reaction to the use of text messages in Christian life appeals to the luddite instinct.
I agree with your post, internetmonk, and you make the point about faith & grace very well.
The problem arises when people read this, and associate text messaging with something intrinsically wrong, when in fact it’s just another culture-specific tool of communication.
The message of your post should be “use whatever means possible to preach the gospel”. If the method distracts people from the gospel, ditch it.
There’s your million-dollar question:
“did using this technology make the gospel clearer for people, or did it distract them?”
Michael. This sounds to me like the high tech version of the old appeal I heard for years, “Now with eyes closed and heads bowed, if you prayed that prayer tonight, look me in the eye…don’t anyone else look around lest we embarrass or discourage them. Yes. Yes. God Bless You. Everybody who made eye contact tonight, if you were sincere, is going to heaven”
Thanks for updating us. Iain Murray wrote short but hard hitting pamphlet, titled The Invitation System examinging its history, use and impact on evangelicalism. Well worth the $3.00
a couple of things…
1. The breathtaking assumption of evangelicalism that everyone they speak to comes from middle-class suburbia and has a cell phone and service with which to text. I used to see this financial assumption all the time in churches I have attended quite frequently. They would plan a function and assume that everyone had the finances to attend and participate. So, church fellowship always had a price tag on it. It never occurred to the speaker that there might be teens without a cell phone…who couldn’t afford a cell phone?
Right off the bat there is a limitation on those who could actually respond in this manner.
2.Simply…Why? Why would it be better to text someone information to send them to a different place to get information? You’re on stage, speaking actual words into a microphone with an actual willing audience. What’s so hard about telling them what they need to know right then? What’s so hard about setting up areas where people can go to talk to someone in more detail about following Jesus?
It seems like a completely unnecessary thing to do. Not very efficient or meaningful.
“I all for getting kids to re-dedicate their lives to God, but convincing them they weren’t saved to begin with?”
Sad part is most of these groups are from churches that have no problem baptizing the under 10 crowd.
Talk about cognitive dissonance.
Now to go talk to my kids more about the church retreats they’ve been to.
Good communication theorists have told us for a long long time that the medium IS part of the message. This point cannot be ignored. Without passing any specific judgement on the “right or wrongs” of using any specific technologies in the communication of the faith it is worth asking orselves “do we want texting to be part of the message?”
What does mobile phone communication mean? What are the values and norms associated with mobile communication? Are these values and norms consistent/inconsistent with the message that evangelism wants to pass on?
Nice post, imonk, but I still find myself a supporter of the altar call. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a supporter of a ‘sign-up for salvation’ gospel, but I think that in the right situation it can have a similar (but no more!) function to baptism. And I see the texting in as -perhaps- a more responsible form of helping people come to God.
I’ll explain myself a bit further
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head that one of the great difficulties of an altar call is that it equates salvation with what can be a quick, perhaps thoughtless decision made one Sunday night.
I would’ve thought most of us would agree that the important function of baptism is not so much in the method – both technique of administering water and the worded declaration that normally accompanies varies sometimes startlingly between traditions – but in the decision before God and the public declaration. Both an altar call and baptism can be compared in that they feature some type of ‘liturgy’ and a heartfelt choice. In my church, we’d probably view an altar call response as a sort of ‘first step’, to be followed by baptism and church membership, which feels quite healthy.
What the use of the text medium can bring is a bit more distance away from the emoted ‘the night I became a Christian’ response and towards ‘the night I got the ball rolling’ IF texting ‘Tony’ for more information amounts to meeting with a pastor in the daylight personally to discuss matters. Seems to me like a reasonable way of establishing personal contact.. if it’s done right. Any thoughts?
Thanks for exposing this ridiculous tomfoolery for what it really is. There are so many “evangelists” that are doing damage to many of their listeners. For too many years has there been “conversions” without discipleship and follow up. I pray that our brothers come to their senses soon.
“A reasonable way of establishing personal contact,” but done in the context of an evangelistic message, with the “every head bowed,” etc. atmosphere? I’ll guarantee you there are hundreds of kids who heard that invitation to text as synonymous with going to heaven.
I think that supporters of the invitation system tend to see it as something people participate in under the very best of understandings and explanations. I’d argue that the exact reverse is true. My years of counseling students tells me that even if explained, the fallen heart is so naturally religious that they cling to the hope of what they “did” as proof they have a “ticket” to heaven.
Don’t get me wrong: A public invitation (please let’s never say altar call. Are we Catholics?) properly deconstructed and explained can be of less harm. But a person’s FIRST step should be prayer to God….not anything else. A person’s second step should be SELD-INITIATED instruction/catechesis. A third step is affirmation by elders and congregation and then Baptism.
The Second London Confession has the clearest statement on Baptism:
Chapter 29: Of Baptism
1. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.
( Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2;12; Galatians 3:27; Mark 1:4; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:4 )
2. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.
( Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36, 37; Acts 2:41; Acts 8:12; Acts 18:8 )
What concerns me is that aisle-walkers and texters take statement #1, replace Baptism with whatever they just did, and say they are Christians based on self-assurance.
peace
ms
Michael, when you say, “A public invitation properly deconstructed and explained can be of less harm,” what do you mean? I’m in total agreement with you about the deadly danger of the “every head bowed, every eye closed, thank you, I see that hand” kind of altar call (ha!), but I guess I don’t see what kind of “harm” there could be in a public invitation. Didn’t the apostles plead with their listeners to be saved? Or is that not what you’re thinking when you think of a “public invitation”?
Here’s how it’s done at my church: whoever of our elders is preaching that weekend breaks the bread and holds up the cup and says the words of institution, then gives us all instructions on coming forward to take communion. Then he urges unbelievers NOT to participate in the Lord’s Supper but rather to be joined to Christ, and to speak to a pastor or a friend after the service. Would you think of that as a harmful invitation? Eep!
Public invitation as in walk forward, altar call, come to the front.
I don’t mean inviting people to believe. That’s the Gospel.
I would always urge unbelievers to do two things: 1) believe 2) pray and whatever else would be clearly separated from that, even talking to an elder.
Otherwise, here is what you get:
“Are you a Christian?”
“I talked to an elder once.”
Preach it Brother.
Wow. I’m surprised they haven’t hit up Twitter for virtual Altar Call invitations yet.
Just for kicks, someone should rewrite the Sinners Prayer as it would be depicted in “txt spk”.
Hehe, though I suspect you’re being a bit tongue-in-cheek, I really find it hard to imagine people claiming Christianity on account of a meeting with an elder, rather than some inward drawing.
I do and agree with you on the danger of replacing baptism with such things, but one thing I would like to hear is what you suggest is to be done regarding evangelism and human responses to it, especially in large church settings?
–
Courtesy of a competition Rejesus.com, a British site, ran ages ago, and in the spirit of the post I thought you might enjoy The Lord’s Prayer in text speak:
“Gzus said…
dad@hvn,ur spshl.
we want wot u want &urth2b like hvn.
giv us food&4giv r sins lyk we 4giv uvaz.
don’t test us! save us! bcos we kno ur boss, ur tuf&ur cool 4 eva!ok?
Matthew 6:9-13
Matthew Cambell, York, England”
http://www.rejesus.co.uk/site/module/r_father_gzux_via_txt/
I think you are on to something. But, wisdom is proven right by all her children. And sometimes her children look different. I was saved by Jesus Christ when I was 11 at a “revival” meeting. A plead to come down and be saved was given and I did. A deacon took me through the scriptures showing me what it meant to be saved. I gave my life over that day to Christ. It was an awakening to what God was already doing in my life and I am ever happy for it. So what’s the difference between a man/woman walking up to you and saying “I want to follow Jesus, will you help me?” Will not you in that moment open the scripture to them and show them how to be saved? What we need is reform in how and why we call people to repentance and call them to be saved. We need pastors to repent from the idolatry of numbers and of blindly following umbiblical traditions and traditions without the Spirit and for the ridiculous condemnations toward those who don’t do invitations like them.
I was a campus pastor for 7 years and there is a big difference between campus ministry and being a local church pastor. Many times I use an invitation for prayer time up front as well as an opportunity to ask about what it means to be saved. Also, church history tells us during the pre-alter call days, that people would break out in loud wails, cries, shouts, proclamations, etc while people like Wesley, Edwards, and Spurgeon were preaching. These are responses to the work of the Word and Spirit. The temptation that must be avoided today is trying to produce this by our own manipulation and our own strength. This is where we need reform. Allowing time at the end for response, questions, and prayer cannot be evil itself but men who are working for their own expense is.
John the Baptist called for repentance from the desert by the Jordan, Jesus did it at the dinner table with sinners. Wisdom has many children and she loves them all.
Unfortunately, even in the context that Tony was working from he missed the boat. The should have been told to text him and 10 of their friends to makes sure it was a public statement the same way walking the isle is.
The biblical method was simply to tell the gospel and exhort people to believe, repent, and be baptized.
I wonder how much our complicating of baptism has been an encouragement to move towards something like alter calls which are seen in closer proximity to our initiation into faith in Christ?
In Acts we see an immediate offer of baptism to those who believe simultanious with presentation of the gospel. In our culture there can be months or years between when we begin trusting Jesus and when we are baptized. We have to take a class, ect. and make sure we invite our families to watch how commited to Jesus we are.
I wonder how many people would have stopped Phillip from baptizing the Ethiopian because he didn’t understand Romans 6 or because his family wasn’t there or that the only believers present were him and Phillip……….
All that is to say that I can see the temptation to have an immediate landmark to when you begin trusting Jesus.
I think the proper Jesus-shaped way of integrating cellphones into an altar call would be for the preacher to say “If you want to follow Jesus, place your cell phone on the pew, take out the Bible in front of you and smash your phone into little pieces.” And the rich young men went away sad because they had unlimited texting and free weekend minutes.
I’ve attended evangelical churches all my life, and I’ve never met anyone who thought that “going forward” saved them. Nor have I ever heard a pastor hint that this was so.
It’s simply a way to meet with someone who can share the gospel one-on-one. I’m not sure how else a pastor would invite people for one on one counselling…staying in their seat til the service was done seems a little awkward.
I understand that people hear and believe the gospel in all sorts of locations and situations, not necessarily church…but I don’t think anyone can deny that there are people who believe the gospel at church and want to pray with someone.
I understand that there may be churches who introduce this in a different way than I’ve heard it, but I can’t see why walking to a deacon/church member/counselor/pastor for more information would be a bad thing.
Georgetta: Could I ask where you live? And what kind of evangelical church you attend where you have never heard someone say “Come forward and be saved?”
I’m quite serious. Not being snarky or rhetorical.
Are you anywhere near Independent Baptists, Southern Baptists or Pentecostals?
Anywhere around large evangelistic events? Like Graham Crusades? Promise Keepers?
Hang on while I reattach my lower jaw (which is busy doing the Visitor Big Gulp). This is gonna get pretty raw — ““Well, I texted the preacher at Winter Jam, so yeah, I’m a Christian”. WHAT WAS “TONY” THINKING?
Over at Slacktivist’s Left Behind Deconstruction blog, they refer to “The Altar Call” sarcastically as “Say-the-Magic-Words Salvation”. Like “The Sinner’s Prayer (TM)” wasn’t an appended knockoff of the Catholic Act of Contrition but some sort of Magick Spell that has to be said just so for God to grant you eternal life. The entire subject of God, Christ, and Salvation boiled down to a duckspeak one-liner; wouldn’t something be lost in such extreme condensation? (And that was spoken, not repeat not TXTMSGNG ABBRVS.)
Back when I was becoming a notch on Bible after Bible, I was told over and over that my previous “Praying the Sinners’ Prayer” wasn’t valid because I hadn’t REALLY meant it or hadn’t said it properly word-for-word. Given the vast variety in TXTMSGNG ABRVS, how long will it take to settle on The Official Texting Version? And what schisms and anathemas will result in the process?
Man, people are stupid. And superstitious. I’m first to admit we RCCs have our own horror stories of devotion-turned-superstition, but why do Evangelicals persist in such denial of their own accreted superstitions, magical thinking, you name it? From my bank of the Tiber, it’s like something out of South Park, all the more surreal because it’s taken so Cosmic-level seriously.
Revivalistic evangelism- esp in the SBC- is eaten up with people who are determined to destroy the assurance of everyone. I’ve watched this my entire life. From “Are you sure….†to “Have you totally surrendered?†and on and on. Guilt. Legalism. Moralism. Guilt. Manipulation. Using college kids and emotional manipulation specialists to get people to say they are REALLY REALLY REALLY gettin’ saved this time. It’s how the whole game works. — IMonk
How do you think I wound up a notch on half a dozen Bibles? Each one deconstructed my previous “Salvation Experience”, basically convincing me I had never REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY Gotten Saved, then swooping in (with Wretched Urgency) to lead me in the Magic Words and cut another notch on his Bible (for Brownie Points at the Bema).
After going through this process over and over, you start wondering if it was all BS from Day One. I ended up swimming the Tiber, but I’m sure “Killing the Authority with application of Dust” was also a popular reaction.
Wow. I’m surprised they haven’t hit up Twitter for virtual Altar Call invitations yet. — Rampancy
Just you wait. I have found through experience that no matter how far-out you get as a joke, some True Believer will go twice as far-out and be Dead Serious.