There is an evangelistic methodology in Christian circles today that is a plague to sound gospel preaching. Some call this “easy believism,” but I don’t like that term. Belief is exactly what God requires for salvation. “For by grace are ye saved THROUGH FAITH; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (Jn. 3:16). Salvation is received by believing. Further, God has made it easy to do. A child can trust Christ and be saved; a weak-minded person can trust Christ and be saved. Salvation is not difficult, except in the sense that the sinner has to humble himself and repent.

I believe a better term for this problem is “easy prayerism.” It is a methodology that focuses on getting people to say a prayer.

Don’t get me wrong. I believe that “whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom. 10:13). I believe that those who pray to God in repentance and ask to be saved WILL be saved. I am not against prayers for salvation.

What I am against is making this the focus of our evangelistic activity. Repeating a prayer is not necessarily salvation, and we must not confuse it with such. Just because 50 people pray a prayer, or raise their hands in a gospel meeting, or some other thing like this, is no evidence whatsoever that those people have been saved. It is one thing to show some interest in salvation; it is quite another thing to be saved.

Some might argue, “Well, I know that just praying a prayer is not salvation.” Why then, I might ask, do so many say that a certain number of people “got saved today” when all they did was pray a prayer? Especially is this true when most of those people don’t even want to come to church. Is that not an unhealthy focus on a prayer? I call this “easy prayerism.”

Please understand that I am not criticizing soul winning. I realize that this type of thing usually is done by those who at least are trying to win people to Christ. I am not trying to dampen anyone’s enthusiasm for lost souls. What I am trying to do is focus attention on a methodology that I believe is unscriptural and unhealthy to the churches. To identify a prayer with salvation is to bring confusion into the gospel.

But let’s turn to the Bible and see what kind of approach the apostles had in dealing with the lost. This is the way to get a right methodology of evangelism. In Acts 17 we see the Apostle Paul dealing with a group of unbelievers in the city of Athens. Here we see the difference between “easy prayerism” and Bible evangelism.

THE APPROACH AND EMPHASIS IS DIFFERENT

“Easy prayerism,” in its approach, emphasizes heaven and blessing and God’s love. Bible evangelism, in its approach, emphasizes God’s holiness and just demands upon mankind; it emphasizes the necessity of repentance.

The sermon Paul preached on Mars Hill is recorded in verses 22-31. It is interesting that he did not say, “Hey, Athenians, God loves you and heaven is wonderful; don’t you want to go to heaven when you die?” Yet this is the approach used by “easy prayerism.” The Four Spiritual Laws of Campus Crusade illustrates this. It approaches the unsaved thusly: “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.”

Bill Bright, the author of the Four Spiritual Laws, admits that he wrestled with his conscience when he changed his approach to a positive one, and even one of his own daughters at that time told him she felt he was on the wrong track. When Bright first wrote his gospel pamphlet in 1958, it began with man’s sin and separation from God. But when the pamphlet was revised a few of years later, in the early ‘60s, he changed this so it would be more positive. We will let him tell this in his own words:

“Originally our first law emphasized man’s sin, but the Lord impressed me to emphasize God’s love. This change was made just before we went to press. I had done my final editing and had left Vonette and the girls to finish the typing. As I had been traveling a great deal and it was quite late, I had gone upstairs to bed. In fact, I was in bed just at the point of going to sleep, when suddenly there came clear as a bell to my conscious mind the fact that there was something wrong about starting the Four Laws on the negative note of man’s sinfulness. ... I felt that few people would say `No’ to Christ if they truly understood how much He loves them and how great is His concern for them.

“So I got out of bed, went to the head of the stairs and called down to Vonette and the girls to revise the presentation so that the first law would be, `God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life,’ instead of `You are a sinner and separated from God.’ ... Thus the Four Spiritual Laws started with the positive note of God’s love and plan.

“Some time later, one of the girls said to me, `I was so distressed over your change in the presentation that I wept that night. I was afraid that you were beginning to dilute the gospel and that you were no longer faithful to the Lord, because you placed such a strong emphasis on the love of God rather than on man’s sin. Now in retrospect, I realize of course that this is one of the greatest things that has ever happened to the Campus Crusade ministry’“ (Bill Bright, Come Help Change the World, Here’s Life Publishers, 1985, pp. 28,29).

We believe Bill Bright’s staff worker was right when she wept and feared that he had diluted the gospel. He has adapted the gospel to the philosophy of the world. He has removed much of the reproach of the cross. He has created an evangelistic tool that can be used successfully by the entire world of apostate ecumenism. His type of gospel presentation is used by modernist World Council of Churches denominations. It is so generic that even Catholics use it. The voice that spoke “clear as a bell” to Bright about changing the approach of the Gospel was not the Lord.

Three decades later, this positive, psychological, man-centered approach has swept through most Christian circles. It is the approach used for the most part by the evangelicals, by the Charismatics, even by most Fundamentalists. While Fundamentalists eschew Campus Crusade’s worldly, new-evangelical approach to Christianity, all too often the soul-winning plan used in fundamentalist circles is almost identical to the Four Spiritual Laws.

We don’t mean to belittle the fact of God’s love for sinners and we don’t mean to say it is wrong to tell the unsaved of that love. God does love sinners, and that is what the Gospel is all about. But when approaching the unsaved, the apostles emphasized God’s holiness and His just demands on a sinful mankind. They emphasized man’s lost condition and the necessity of repentance. This is the right way to approach the unsaved. It is not very positive and does not fit in with the popular philosophy of the hour, and might not result in as many “decisions,” but it is Bible.

The Bible does not start with God’s love. It starts with God’s character and with man’s fall. In fact, the entire first two thirds of the Bible deals with this before we even get to the New Testament presentation of Christ. Why is this? Who would deny that the Old Testament is overwhelmingly negative? And why is this? Are we to ignore the fact that God lays a foundation of law for the presentation of the Gospel? Evangelists and revivalists of old certainly followed the Bible’s pattern in this. The apostles certainly did. Who are we to change this?

Why the negative approach? Why not just focus on God’s love and on Heaven, and let sin take care of itself. Because unsaved man does not understand nor appreciate the love of God until he understands the holiness and justice of God. When Paul preached the gospel in the book of Romans, he did not even mention the love of God until chapter 5. He began with God, with God’s claims on man, with the law, with man’s wretched condition. God uses the law to create in man the understanding he needs of God and sin in order to get saved. The law is the schoolmaster to bring sinners to Christ (Gal. 3:24).

At an evangelistic meeting overseas I once preached a message patterned on Acts 17. The local leaders told me after the close of the meeting that this type of preaching was “too negative” and I should be more positive in presenting the Gospel. One missionary told me that Paul was probably in the flesh when he preached that message on Mars Hill, thus we should not follow his example! This, of course, is foolishness. If preaching the Bible and warning the unsaved of God’s holy demands and requiring repentance of them is too negative, then so be it.

THE REQUIREMENT IS DIFFERENT

“Easy prayerism” emphasizes faith and prayer. “Just believe. Don’t worry about giving up things; that will come in time. Just pray this prayer.” Bible evangelism, rather, emphasizes repentance.

“And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent” (Acts 17:30). That is what Paul required of his listeners, and that is exactly what we must require. Repentance was not just something preached by John the Baptist. Repentance was preached by Christ (Matt. 3:1,2; Lk 5:32; 13:1-5). He said, “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Christ’s goal in dealing with men was to bring them to repentance. Repentance was also preached by the Apostles (Acts 2:38; 5:31; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20). The Bible says that God is “longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). Repentance is God’s goal in dealing with sinners.

And repentance means a change of mind that results in a change of life. It means to turn to God from sin. It means to bow before Jesus Christ as the God of one’s life. Bible examples of repentance show a clear change in people’s behavior. The change does not save us from sin, but IT IS the clear fruit of Bible salvation.

Consider Zacchaeus. He repented, and the evidence of this is that he gave half his goods to the poor and restored five-fold that which he had stolen through his tax collecting business (Lk. 19:1-10). Consider the idolators at Thessalonica. They repented, and the evidence of this was that they “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God” (1 Thess. 1:9- 10). Consider the Jews in Acts 2 who heard the sermon Peter preached at Pentecost. They repented, and the evidence of this is that they gladly received his word, were baptized, and joined themselves with the hated Christians. We could go on and on. There is no Bible example of people being saved who did not evidence a drastic change in their lives. Repentance is a change of mind that results in a change of life.

And the Bible approach to the sinner is to demand that he repent and turn to God. The Apostle Paul reviewed his ministry before King Agrippa, and noted that he went about preaching to Jews and Gentiles both “that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance” (Acts 26:20). This is exactly the message that we are to preach today.

To preach repentance means to deal plainly with sin. There is a sense in which we can say that the word “repentance” encompasses all of the Gospel’s requirements for salvation. It is a change of mind and a faith in God which results in a change of life, and that is what God requires of the sinner. Bible translator William Tyndale gives the following definition:

“Concerning this word REPENTANCE ... the very sense and signification both of the Hebrew and also of the Greek word is, “to be converted and to turn to God with all the heart, to know his will, and to live according to his laws; and to be cured of our corrupt nature with the oil of his Spirit, and wine of obedience to his doctrine.” Which conversion or turning, if it be unfeigned, these four do accompany it and are included therein: CONFESSION, not in the priest’s ear, for that is but man’s invention, but to God in the heart, and before all the congregation of God; how that we be sinners and sinful, and that our whole nature is corrupt, and inclined to sin and all unrighteousness, and therefore evil, wicked, and damnable; and his Law holy and just, by which our sinful nature is rebuked: and also to our neighbours, if we have offended any person particularly. Then CONTRITION, sorrowfulness that we be such damnable sinners, and not only have sinned, but are wholly inclined to sin still. Thirdly, FAITH (of which our old doctors have made no mention at all in the description of their penance), that God for Christ’s sake doth forgive us, and receive us to mercy, and is at one with us, and will heal our corrupt nature. And fourthly, SATISFACTION, or amends-making, not to God with holy works, but to my neighbour whom I have hurt, and to the congregation of God, whom I have offended, (if any open crime be found in me); and submitting of a man’s self unto the congregation or church of Christ, and to the officers of the same, to have his life corrected and governed henceforth of them.” (William Tyndale, “To The Reader,” 1534)

Note that this man of God wraps confession, contrition, faith, and satisfaction into the term repentance. There is no easy prayerism here. The sinner who would be saved must repent, which repentance will always result in a changed life.

This means that we cannot have the attitude that we will only deal with specific sin after the person receives Christ. That is the philosophy of many. If the sinner brings up his love for liquor, or his love for immoral relationships, or his love for gambling, some think it best to delay dealing with such things until after that one has come to Christ. And sometimes this is the best policy, but only if the sinner is clearly under the conviction of the Holy Spirit in regard to his sin and is clearly ready to turn to Christ. On the other hand, if the sinner obviously still wants to hold onto his sin, the personal worker must deal with the fact that he must turn from it.

When my wife and I first began our work in the land of South Asia in 1979, our landlord began coming to our house to have Bible studies. He was a wealthy middle-aged Hindu and had a concubine that he spent most of his time with, though he was married and had grown children. After we went through the gospel a few times, he told me he was interested in receiving Christ, but he needed to know what he would have to do about two specific things in his life--his shady business practices, and his illicit relationship with his concubine. I could have said, “Don’t worry about those things. Just pray to receive Christ and those things will work out later.” But I don’t believe that is Bible council. I don’t believe he could receive Christ and be saved unless he was willing to repent of his immorality and his dishonesty.

During our work in South Asia, we could have gotten half the people to pray a prayer if we had wanted to do that. If we had approached them by asking them if they wanted to go to heaven if they died, and if so would they pray a sinner’s prayer, 90% of them would have muttered a prayer. They were accustomed to mantras, and chants, and mysterious utterings and would have seen the sinner’s prayer in the same light. If we had urged them only to believe without dealing with them about repentance, we would have had a multitude of unrepentant, “believing” Hindus on our hands--but believing in what? They eagerly believed that Jesus was a god, that he was good, that he loved them. But they commonly wanted to add him to their other gods, not receive Him exclusively as God.

During our gospel meetings there, if we had asked for a show of hands of those who wanted to be saved, most of the hands would have gone up. But we knew that most of these Hindus were not ready to turn to Christ FROM THEIR IDOLS and to bear the heavy reproach and persecution of their government and neighbors. In other words, they were not ready to be saved. Without repentance, there is no salvation. “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Lk. 13:5). It is imperative to deal with people about their sin and about repentance.

Someone might say, “Yes, but that is in a place where people have never heard the gospel. Things are different here.” Sure things are different here, but the fact is that the average person in North America today is almost as gospel ignorant as someone in India. The average person we meet in many parts of North America has no knowledge of the Bible’s teaching, not even of its stories and basic content. His mind is filled with the myths of evolution and modernism. Someone who has been educated in the North American public school system and who has had no sound Bible training is actually more prejudiced against believing that the Bible is the Word of God than a Hindu in darkest Asia. The same is true for England and Europe.

The Bible principles of dealing with people are the same no matter where those people are found. The Bible requires repentance.

When the Lord Jesus dealt with the rich young ruler who inquired about salvation, He did not tell him just to pray a prayer, just to believe. He dealt with him plainly about his love for riches, his covetousness and pride. The young man had to repent of that deep sin of his live before he could be saved. He went away sad, the Bible says, because of his great riches. Consider Christ’s dealings with the woman at the well. He faced her squarely with the immorality that had controlled her life and required repentance of her in that matter. This is the way God always deals with people, and it is the way we must deal with them, too, if we want to follow the Bible in our gospel work. To preach repentance means to deal with specific sins that people are holding onto, and to tell them in no uncertain terms that they must repent of those sins before they can be saved.

This is not “Lordship salvation.” This is not some kind of Puritan methodology. It is simple Bible evangelism.

THE EXPECTATION IS DIFFERENT

“Easy prayerism” seems to expect only some sort of interest and willingness to pray a prayer on the part of the sinner. But interest isn’t salvation, and neither is the willingness to pray a prayer. Bible evangelism, on the other hand, looks for and expects conviction of sin that has been wrought by God. Here we want to quote from “Seven Certain Signs: A Christian Worker’s Guide to the Marks of True Conversion.”

“The first mark of grace in the passage is the experience of conviction of sin which leads to true repentance (Acts 2:37-39).

Baptism could only be performed when the people had shown that they were pricked in their heart, thus showing real shame and concern for sinful lives, and genuine longing for forgiveness.

“In discerning a person’s spiritual progress we therefore look for the broken and contrite heart that the Lord will not despise (Psalm 51). If we feel that there has been only a cool, intellectual acknowledgment of sin (or a momentary squall of emotion) coupled with a very formal or limited repentance, we will have to be very doubtful that conversion has really occurred.

“`Testimonies’ which make no mention of repentance are suspect in the extreme. All those pop-star conversion stories (often given in glib, joking language) which make conversion sound so painless, lack this essential mark of grace. We hear people say that they `could not cope’ with life, and so they asked Jesus to take over, with the result that He now stands by them (even on stage), and makes them much more successful in their (unchanged worldly) lives!

“The Lord Jesus Christ must be a Saviour from sin before He is anything else to a person. The idea that a person can `receive Christ’ in a moment merely because he feels mildly hollow inside is a tragic delusion and bears no resemblance to the conversion of the Bible. We must look for some sign that a person has come under real conviction and has bowed in sorrow before God with a deep and earnest desire to receive pardon and new life.

“We do not expect all seekers to feel quite the depths of shame and soul- stirring grief that we read about in some Christian biographies or in revival histories, but ... they must exhibit in some way the broken, contrite heart that trusts the Christ of Calvary alone for pardon.”

This is important, and we believe it hits the nail on the head in regard to something that is lacking in much of today’s evangelism. I have been soul winning with many men who have encouraged people to pray a sinner’s prayer when it was obvious, to me at least, that the people were not under any conviction of sin. I do not find it surprising when these people will not even so much as visit the church.

Years ago, my wife and I were responsible to follow up on the ladies’ soul winning visitation program in a certain church. This program was patterned after a popular plan that focuses on “getting decisions,” and involves clever ways of manipulating people to say a salvation prayer. It was not uncommon for the ladies to return from these visitations and rejoice that three, or five, or ten “souls were saved.” The problem is that these “saved souls” usually had no interest whatsoever in coming to church, in baptism, or anything spiritual.

Why is it so often a real tug of war to get people discipled that have prayed a sinner’s prayer? Because so often they are not saved; they have never been under the conviction of the Holy Spirit; they do not yet even understand the Gospel; they have never repented of their sin. Too often they should never have been encouraged to pray a prayer. The personal worker looked for the wrong thing. He looked for some interest on the part of the sinner, when he should have looked for something Holy Spirit-wrought, something real and deep.

And I am not talking about putting people through some sort of long, drawn out agony over their sin. When it is evident that God is convicting them, it is time to point them to Christ as their sin-bearer. They don’t necessarily have to go through days or weeks of mourning. They don’t have to follow someone’s formula for properly mourning over their sin. People are different and they are going to react differently to Holy Spirit conviction. But they DO have to be convinced of their wickedness before God, and they DO have to be clearly repentant. Anything short of this is not Bible salvation.

The old-timers had what they called the “anxious room” and the “mourners bench.” The anxious room was a place where the unsaved could go when they were under conviction. That is why they used the term “anxious.” Folk were clearly anxious about their sin and their lost condition. And the mourner’s bench was something similar. The term “mourner” referred to the sinner under Holy Spirit conviction for sin. Where is the anxious room today? Where is the mourner’s bench? Most churches don’t have anything like this anymore, because a new positive methodology has taken over and anxiety and mourning over sin is not something we expect anymore.

We fundamentalists criticize the shallow Hollywood and sports star conversions that so obviously lack Holy Spirit conviction and repentance. But I am afraid we are promoting the same type of problem when we say people are saved who have done nothing more than say a prayer and who do not evidence true repentance. It is often the same type of shallow, positive approach that is used, and I believe this is one of the culprit’s in the matter.

A weak gospel produces weak converts. Is it any wonder that the Four Spiritual Laws produces converts who do not see anything wrong with rock music, or with Hollywood’s cesspool productions, or with dancing and drinking, or with mixing together with Romanism and Modernism and Pentecostalism? The new-evangelical crowd sees little or nothing wrong with any of this wickedness. It should be no wonder. A weak gospel produces weak converts.

But what about the gospel popularly presented in fundamental circles? What kind of converts are we producing in our fundamental churches today? Yes, praise God, there are some wonderful saints of God in our midst. But there is also a crop of strangely weak converts in fundamental churches. Converts who have no zeal for truth. Converts which have no real love for the Bible. Converts which don’t care enough about the church even to attend Sunday evening or mid-week services. Converts who never try to win anyone else to Christ. Converts who have no discernment between truth and error, who will watch some Pentecostal preacher on the television and be impressed that he must be a real man of God, and can’t understand why the pastor thinks the Pentecostals are so wrong. Converts which seem as at home in the world as lost people are. They watch the same wicked Hollywood movies and have the same vile television programs on every evening; they laugh at the same dirty comedians; they go naked at the same beaches; they listen to the same worldly music.

I’m not trying to be unkind. I’m trying to point out a tremendous problem. I think a lot of these “converts” are not saved. Could it not be that this harvest of weak converts is being produced by a weak gospel approach, an approach that we have unconsciously adopted from the worldly ecumenical Christian crowd? Too often we are trying to disciple people who have never experienced true conviction or repentance or regeneration.

I realize that some of the biggest-name fundamental leaders in recent decades have popularized this type of thing, emphasizing numbers of decisions or prayers rather than repentance and Bible salvation. But we should not follow them in this. They are leading us away from the Bible.

We must look for one thing in our Gospel work, and that is true Holy Spirit-wrought conviction and repentance.

THE COUNTING IS DIFFERENT

“Easy prayerism” counts prayers, decisions, professions. Bible evangelism counts genuine heart-felt, Holy Spirit-wrought faith and repentance that results in a new way of life. Bible evangelism counts genuine Bible regeneration, and is not interested in anything less.

Contrast many of the reports we hear of “souls saved.” A missionary to an eastern European country wrote recently and said that 250 were saved during the past year. Yet only eleven were baptized, and there were only ten or so in their church services. Does it look like 250 people really repented of their sins and received Christ as their Savior? No, it looks like perhaps eleven did. The others were the result of “easy prayerism.” Why not say that 250 prayed a prayer, or 250 made some sort of decision, or 250 showed an interest in the Gospel. That is the truth of the matter. Why confuse things and say 250 were saved, when there is no Bible evidence whatsoever that they were? Why say that the angels in heaven are rejoicing over these salvations, when there is no evidence that salvation has happened? I don’t quite understand the motivation in all of this.

We don’t believe it is wrong to count converts. The Bible counts converts in several cases. But this is just the point. It only counts true converts, not people who prayed a prayer or something of this sort. It counts those who were clearly born again. Those saved on the day of Pentecost were counted. But we have already noted how that they made clear evidence of repentance.

This is what we see in Acts 17. The Bible tells us about those who responded to Paul’s message. There were three groups. Some mocked. Others put the matter off, saying, “We will hear thee again of this matter.” But a third group is mentioned. “Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed...” (v. 34).

The Bible focuses on those who showed genuine evidence of having been born again. They believed. That was what brought them salvation. But their believing resulted in cleaving! They clave to Paul. They stayed right with him. When he left the meeting, they went with him. They went home with him; they went to church with him. They joined themselves with the Christians! Their believing resulted in a dramatic change. It always does. Some evidence change more rapidly and dramatically than others, but there is always a clear change.

This is real Bible salvation. When you see people being baptized and cleaving to the house of God, you have good cause to rejoice and to say that some folk have gotten saved, that the bells of heaven are ringing. On the other hand, when people pray salvation prayers and make public “decisions” for Christ, but aren’t interested in getting baptized, and coming faithfully to church, and learning the Word of God, and being with God’s people--they didn’t get saved and we should not count them as such.

To get people to pray to “receive Christ” when they are not under conviction of sin and are not ready to repent, and to say that people are saved when they do not have evidence of Bible salvation is to confuse the gospel in a most fantastic way. It fills the land with people who are almost inoculated to the gospel. When you try to deal with these people about their need for Christ, they tell you they “have already done that.” Done what? Well, they have prayed that prayer, they have gone through those motions. And just where did they get the idea that salvation is merely a prayer without a life change? They got that idea from those who are promoting this type of thing. The fruit, my friends, has been fearful. The charismatics are tremendously guilty of this, but, as we have noted, so are great numbers of fundamental Baptists.

I preach in a county jail and it is common for those who come to the Bible studies to claim that they are saved. When we ask them why they think they are saved, they often point to a time when they prayed a sinner’s prayer, or walked the aisle of a church, or were baptized. When we ask them if their life changed after they prayed the sinner’s prayer, they usually acknowledge that it did not. They associate salvation with some sort of religious ritual, such as praying a prayer or walking an aisle. They usually show very little or no remorse over their sin and even over the crimes that put them into jail. They don’t seem to understand what a wretched testimony and how tremendously incongruous it is for a Christian to be in jail. All too often they are full of the same self-justification and deception that the unsaved display in prison.

It is so rare that they point to a real relationship with Jesus Christ. So rarely do they say, “I know I am saved because I remember when I came to Jesus Christ and received Him as my Lord and Savior; I walked and talked with Him; I served Him; what a joy that was; but then I was foolish and backslid.” When they do give a testimony like this, we can have good reason to think they might indeed be saved, particularly if they show genuine remorse over their sin and over their backsliding against God.

We need to do everything in our power to make people understand that an unrepentant prayer is not salvation, any more than any other religious ritual is salvation. These people don’t need to be counseled to grow in Christ, they need to be counseled to be saved! If a repentant sinner under conviction of sin prays to be saved, Christ will receive Him and he will be saved--and his life will change. But if an unrepentant person prays, nothing spiritual, nothing eternal whatsoever happens. Let’s not be guilty of causing any sinner to think differently.

Click here for Part 2 of Easy Prayerism or Bible Evangelism.