Soul Winning

[Patebald]

Man made?
Yeah, except for that 'daily, from house to house' verse in the BIBLE!

TH, do you honestly believe that is what Acts 2 & 20 is referring to when it talks about going house to house? That they were knocking on doors of unregenerate souls asking them if they were to die they would go to heaven?

Door to Door "soul-winning", as we understand it in terms of fundamentalism/evangelicalism, is a man-made form of outreach. I'm not against going from house to house for breaking bread and teaching doctrine... I believe that is a biblical form and model of the church.

 

[Billy]

Not sure how that one verse in Proverbs became what it is...it has nothing to do with evangelism...It has everything to do with wisdom.

Proverbs 11:30  The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and the one who plucks that good life is wise.

Matthew Henry seems to partially agree with 'them' on this verse:

Verse 30 This shows what great blessings good men are, especially those that are eminently wise, to the places where they live, and therefore how much to be valued. 1. The righteous are as trees of life; the fruits of their piety and charity, their instructions, reproofs, examples, and prayers, their interest in heaven, and their influence upon earth, are like the fruits of that tree, precious and useful, contributing to the support and nourishment of the spiritual life in many; they are the ornaments of paradise, God’s church on earth, for whose sake it stands. 2. The wise are something more; they are as trees of knowledge, not forbidden, but commanded knowledge. He that is wise, by communicating his wisdom, wins souls, wins upon them to bring them in love with God and holiness, and so wins them over into the interests of God’s kingdom among men. The wise are said to turn many to righteousness, and that is the same with winning souls here, Dan. 12:3 . Abraham’s proselytes are called the souls that he had gotten, Gen. 12:5 . Those that would win souls have need of wisdom to know how to deal with them; and those that do win souls show that they are wise.

No doubt it is a misunderstood verse...I could post a few of my favorites biblical scholars that would disagree.

I think a honest look at the content and context of Proverbs as a whole and chapter 11 would lead one to conclude this verse has nothing to do with evangelism.

Just my .02 cents

Just pointing out that many commentators, past and present consider that verse as referencing evangelism....not something IFB's pulled out of thin air nor, out of context, IMO!

By the way, welcome to the FFF.....I've been here exclusively since I was drummed out of the secret society. 

I dumped the secret 6ers recently myself...they let Buffa gain control.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Man made?
Yeah, except for that 'daily, from house to house' verse in the BIBLE!

TH, do you honestly believe that is what Acts 2 & 20 is referring to when it talks about going house to house? That they were knocking on doors of unregenerate souls asking them if they were to die they would go to heaven?

Door to Door "soul-winning", as we understand it in terms of fundamentalism/evangelicalism, is a man-made form of outreach. I'm not against going from house to house for breaking bread and teaching doctrine... I believe that is a biblical form and model of the church.

I believe one of the purposes of this was absolutely outreach/evangelism.
And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.  Acts 5:42

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

It would be a big help if you could identify this horrible, horrible method of outreach.

Showing up at someone's house, uninvited and unannounced, to ask them if they were to die they would go to heaven is a horrible practice. Door to door outreach is not Biblical, it's manmade. It may have worked in an earlier epoch and culture when people weren't as aloof as they are today. But today, it's a horrible practice and I believe it gives the church a bad rep in the community.

Man made?
Yeah, except for that 'daily, from house to house' verse in the BIBLE!

As I have stated earlier on this thread, I basically agree with your cultural assessment of the effectiveness of such a plan and do not use that method personally or in our ministry.

But, man made it isn't.

Don't stop. You also have Acts 2:45. Keep that one also?

They would sell their land and the things they owned and then divide the money and give it to anyone who needed it.

So, nothing in the book of Acts is applicable today if everything isn't applicable today?
Hermeneutics can be your friend...introduce yourself! 

 

[Patebald]

"So, nothing in the book of Acts is applicable today if everything isn't applicable today?"

Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Patebald]

Sorry TH - I'm sitting at lunch on my iPhone reading this thread. Thought the above was to me. I got really lost


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Walt]

It would be a big help if you could identify this horrible, horrible method of outreach.

Showing up at someone's house, uninvited and unannounced, to ask them if they were to die they would go to heaven is a horrible practice. Door to door outreach is not Biblical, it's manmade. It may have worked in an earlier epoch and culture when people weren't as aloof as they are today. But today, it's a horrible practice and I believe it gives the church a bad rep in the community.

Thanks for clarifying; I don't know if other people are like me, but (especially as I get older) time is precious to me, and I don't like strangers knocking on my door, and (generally) wasting my time.  The only people I've ever had knock on my door were Jehovah's Witnesses [sic, sic, sic], but I've been with fellow IFBers who knock on a door, tell the person that they only want to take a "few minutes" and then spend 20 minutes or so going through a canned approach.

 

[Walt]

Man made?
Yeah, except for that 'daily, from house to house' verse in the BIBLE!

TH, do you honestly believe that is what Acts 2 & 20 is referring to when it talks about going house to house? That they were knocking on doors of unregenerate souls asking them if they were to die they would go to heaven?

Door to Door "soul-winning", as we understand it in terms of fundamentalism/evangelicalism, is a man-made form of outreach. I'm not against going from house to house for breaking bread and teaching doctrine... I believe that is a biblical form and model of the church.

I believe one of the purposes of this was absolutely outreach/evangelism.
And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.  Acts 5:42

Interesting discussion.

Acts 2:46 seems to clearly be talking only about Christian fellowship; what they did from house to house was "break bread", which is, I believe, an expression of fellowship.

Acts 20:20, Paul is speaking with the elders of the Ephesian church, and says that he has taught them both publicly, and house-to-house. Again, as the early church met in houses, I thought that this just meant that Paul instructed them in their daily meetings, not that he knocked on stranger's doors.  Re-reading the passage in preparation for posting here, it seems that "house to house" is contrasted with "publicly" and may just be an expression meaning "in private".

Another 0.02 thrown into this interesting discussion.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Man made?
Yeah, except for that 'daily, from house to house' verse in the BIBLE!

TH, do you honestly believe that is what Acts 2 & 20 is referring to when it talks about going house to house? That they were knocking on doors of unregenerate souls asking them if they were to die they would go to heaven?

Door to Door "soul-winning", as we understand it in terms of fundamentalism/evangelicalism, is a man-made form of outreach. I'm not against going from house to house for breaking bread and teaching doctrine... I believe that is a biblical form and model of the church.

I believe one of the purposes of this was absolutely outreach/evangelism.
And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.  Acts 5:42

Interesting discussion.

Acts 2:46 seems to clearly be talking only about Christian fellowship; what they did from house to house was "break bread", which is, I believe, an expression of fellowship.

Acts 20:20, Paul is speaking with the elders of the Ephesian church, and says that he has taught them both publicly, and house-to-house. Again, as the early church met in houses, I thought that this just meant that Paul instructed them in their daily meetings, not that he knocked on stranger's doors.  Re-reading the passage in preparation for posting here, it seems that "house to house" is contrasted with "publicly" and may just be an expression meaning "in private".

Another 0.02 thrown into this interesting discussion.

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

I think Acts 5:42 undoubtedly includes evangelism. As we know, Acts is a book of transition and in Jerusalem in the early days there was, by all accounts, a huge number who came to Christ in a short period of time....from the background of Judaism. They had a basic understanding of OT Scripture and the promise of Messiah.

Now, later the message and methods changed as they left the Jewish culture and went into the Gentile/pagan world. And, as I've stated before, I have not and do not use the house to house method of evangelism...because I think it would be poor stewardship of time and 'information'.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

There's nothing like a teacher who needs a remedial English course.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

There's nothing like a teacher who needs a remedial English course.

That's all you've got?
Those who can DO...those who can't....

And, BTW:
site - to be placed. ( I just taught you something...)

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

There's nothing like a teacher who needs a remedial English course.

That's all you've got?
Those who can DO...those who can't....

And, BTW:
site - to be placed. ( I just taught you something...)

Ooh, intellectual dishonesty.  Another great qualification for being a teacher.

 

[ALAYMAN]

1) Noted
2) Ah, but I was very specific in what I said; I said "in the epistles" on purpose to exclude what is commonly called "The Great Commission" -- but that seems clearly give to the church as a whole, and not to every individual: otherwise, every individual has a command to baptize and teach; very few churches that I've been a part of allow just anyone to baptize, and I know that not everyone can teach.

I'm NOT talking about being a witness; I'm specifically referring to the demand that EVERY member participate in the going door-to-door and button-holing strangers and trying to get them to say a prayer, and then try to leverage that into making them come to church, and then to get baptized.

I agree with you that the salesman style 1-2-3 pray with me method is bad, but there's nothing wrong with confrontational evangelism.  There are a variety of ways to bring the gospel to people, and I am grateful for those who care enough about souls to deliver it, in whatever way they see fit.  Of course there are some qualifiers with that statement, like speaking the truth in love, and not being obnoxious for the sake of offense (like the Westboro Baptist nuts).

 

[ALAYMAN]

i think each christian has different strengths and gifts that might make one type of personal evangelism work well for one... while something else works better for another....... i;m glad there are people who can go door to door...... but knocking on peoples doors would never work well for me........ but going out early on saturday morning and finding the homeless...taking them food and sometimes clothing...  then sharing the gospel with them ... inviting them to church..... does work for me........ it;s the thing God placed on my heart to do.... and i think that;s what is important for each of us to figure out.... what is it God would have us to do?.... then get busy doing it......... that does a lot more good than trying to do something God might not have cut us out for..... and many times more good than sitting back and doing nothing while smugly criticizing the efforts of others...... that makes for depressed christians in the long run... .. and for a very depressing thread in the mean time here....... 

but all this has left me to wonder.... does anyone believe this part of scripture is relevant to christians today?... does no blame attach itself to us, at all..if we fail to share the gospel with others... and they die in their sins?...........

ezekiel 33:8 .....when I say unto the wicked, o wicked man, thou shalt surely die; ..... if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; ....but his blood will I require at thine hand.......

Good question.

I like at the nature of your question similarly to the issue of women dressing immodestly.  Many dolts will blame the woman for dressing provocatively whilst dismissing guilt for the man lusting.  The truth is, both are in error, assuming the female in question is truly dressed immodestly.  She must accept responsibility for her sin, and the man must not blame the woman for what he should control by walking in the Spirit.  With the Ezekiel passage the person who dies in their sin won't be able to point fingers for why they didn't get saved, as they are ultimately responsible for their own souls, but the Christian who is apathetic and sluggardly towards their responsibility to live and preach the gospel is also guilty of sin.

 

[Walt]

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

I think Acts 5:42 undoubtedly includes evangelism. As we know, Acts is a book of transition and in Jerusalem in the early days there was, by all accounts, a huge number who came to Christ in a short period of time....from the background of Judaism. They had a basic understanding of OT Scripture and the promise of Messiah.

Now, later the message and methods changed as they left the Jewish culture and went into the Gentile/pagan world. And, as I've stated before, I have not and do not use the house to house method of evangelism...because I think it would be poor stewardship of time and 'information'.

May I ask what your method other than house-to-house is?  When I bring this up to IFB(x) friends who won't go hysterical, they always turn around with "... and how would you suggest a better way?"

 

[bruinboy]

Just my opinion, but there is no such thing as "Soul Winning".  Jesus, by His death on the cross, has already "won em", our part is to  tell others what has already been accomplished by His death.  100% Him 0% us. By His grace, he allows us to be blessed by telling others. If He chose to, He could have used a head of lettuce and just as many people would be saved. You know, the "name is written down in the Lamb's Book of Life, before the world began" thing. You don't think they get on the list after they are saved, or if you are of the HAC, EE crowd, once you trick em into being saved do you?  : 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Just my opinion, but there is no such thing as "Soul Winning".  Jesus, by His death on the cross, has already "won em", our part is to  tell others what has already been accomplished by His death.  100% Him 0% us. By His grace, he allows us to be blessed by telling others. If He chose to, He could have used a head of lettuce and just as many people would be saved. You know, the "name is written down in the Lamb's Book of Life, before the world began" thing. You don't think they get on the list after they are saved, or if you are of the HAC, EE crowd, once you trick em into being saved do you?  :

First the Calvinists say we can't take any credit for our own salvation (via making the right decision), and now you tell us we can't take any credit for winning the souls of others? 

Dang, what a party-pooper.

 

[Liberty1]

Just my opinion, but there is no such thing as "Soul Winning".  Jesus, by His death on the cross, has already "won em", our part is to  tell others what has already been accomplished by His death.  100% Him 0% us. By His grace, he allows us to be blessed by telling others. If He chose to, He could have used a head of lettuce and just as many people would be saved. You know, the "name is written down in the Lamb's Book of Life, before the world began" thing. You don't think they get on the list after they are saved, or if you are of the HAC, EE crowd, once you trick em into being saved do you?  :

First the Calvinists say we can't take any credit for our own salvation (via making the right decision), and now you tell us we can't take any credit for winning the souls of others? 

Dang, what a party-pooper.

It's kind of like the Calvinist preacher who told the farmer that God had blessed him with a good crop. The farmer said: "Yes He did, but you should have seen this field when God had it all by Himself."

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I agree with you about the above Scriptures, although there might be some discussion on Acts 20:20....which is why I didn't site them.

I think Acts 5:42 undoubtedly includes evangelism. As we know, Acts is a book of transition and in Jerusalem in the early days there was, by all accounts, a huge number who came to Christ in a short period of time....from the background of Judaism. They had a basic understanding of OT Scripture and the promise of Messiah.

Now, later the message and methods changed as they left the Jewish culture and went into the Gentile/pagan world. And, as I've stated before, I have not and do not use the house to house method of evangelism...because I think it would be poor stewardship of time and 'information'.

May I ask what your method other than house-to-house is?  When I bring this up to IFB(x) friends who won't go hysterical, they always turn around with "... and how would you suggest a better way?"

We use a number of outreach methods and programs. I linked to The Story earlier in this thread...it is, IMO, a good method to 'witness to' this culture. I think the 15 minute Romans Road encounter method has always been deficient, to say the least.

There are also many ways to share your faith in Christ, but IMO, leading/exposing someone to the Gospel usually requires a relationship, so building relationships with lost people must be a part of outreach, again, IMO.

 

[subllibrm]

The NT doesn't have "Sharing the Gospel as a Church". It's commanded to occur one on one, as you go about your day.

Once someone is interested, you plan a time to meet to study the bible with them. At their home, the park or your own for example.

Does this not cross the line of home bible-study? I should probably let my pastor how about that.  8)

I was thinking that too!  :-\