Paradoxical question

[crossnote]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever). But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy. But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

A born again Christian will want to do whatever to please God, the unregenerate man hates God and cares nothing about pleasing Him.
Jesus died for the latter. If an atheist (or anyone for that matter) doesn't see himself as a helpless sinner in need of a Savior, there isn't much you can do. Conviction of sin is the Holy Spirit's job, not ours.

 

[BibleBeliever1611]

It would be necessary, in my mind, because it would be the appropriate response to the question that was asked. Maybe I'm taking your hypothetical too seriously?

Would you respond to that question by saying, "No works are necessary for salvation, just believe." I guess that might work if you're just trying to get another notch in your evangelism belt. But would that be a fair response to an atheist who doesn't want to do good works? What would your response be if that same atheist comes to you with questions about counting the cost and carrying the cross? Can you brush that aside, as well? No, it's not helpful to deal in half truths

I would tell him that he should indeed do works, but believing is the bare minimum what he must do to be saved. There is a difference between what you "should do" and what you "must do."

 

[timothyu]

You would need to qualify which meaning you intended to denote.

Ah... good old theology. Redefining scripture just like good and evil to suit the purposes of the definer.

 

[childeye 2]

Ah... good old theology. Redefining scripture just like good and evil to suit the purposes of the definer.

Scripture qualifies the term "works". There are the works of the law as opposed to works of faith. Those are two different types of works in scripture. In our language, works can mean anything where one expends energy. There are dead works also in scripture, but I doubt that the atheist in this scenario would be applying that meaning.

 

[timothyu]

works can mean anything where one expends energy.

And as Jesus said, the most beneficial use of that energy is directing it toward others instead of self.

 

[Albion]

Why would that be necessary if getting saved requires no works?

It does require works.

That isn't the same as saying that doing works contributes to one's chances of being saved.

 

[childeye 2]

And as Jesus said the most beneficial use of that energy is directing it toward others instead of self.

Yes, since it is empathy that sees no difference between serving myself and serving others. Whereas the carnal mind sees the two as opposed to one another.

 

[bling]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever). But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy. But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

First off I try to compliment the person I am talking with something like Paul did in Athens.

I would probably say something like: “You do well to realize your own degree of commitment.” or “It is right for you to feel God is not worthy of any effort from you, since you at this time, hell bound, but suppose God showered you with unbelievable wonderful gifts including eternal life do you think you might feel grateful toward God and would your wants change?” And follow that up with: “What in your life might you be willing to commit some effort toward changing?” or “Is there anything in your life you might want to change enough to work toward achieving?” “Would you stoop down to pick up a million dollars, if it was laid before you?”

 

[JIMINZ]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

Where, or at what point in your presentation of the Gospel of Salvation to an Atheist, does the question of Works ever arise that, that statement by him would ever be made.?

This would mean, (YOU) are Preaching a Gospel of Works not Salvation.

 

[JIMINZ]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

Weren't we ALL Atheists right up to the point of our Salvation?

Rom. 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Rom. 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

What then has your experience been concerning Works, in your personal walk with the Lord, do you do them or not?

If you do, why, if not why not?

Paul said.

Eph. 2:10
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

What has been said above, does not sound as though the Believer has a choice either way, the Believer Will do Good Works, the Non Believer Will Not.

 

[JIMINZ]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

Why in your Hypothetical Paradox do you begin with the assumption, (The Atheist knows the importance of Works concerning the Believer)?

Sounds like he is in agreement with what you have presented, but he still wants to control the conditions of his Salvation before committing.

Do you find this is what you did, when you first Believed?

 

[Rachel20]

.

 

[5thKingdom]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever). But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy. But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

Mar 6:11-12
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you,
when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet
for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be
more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment,
than for that city. And they went out, and preached that men
should repent.

The Gospel command seems pretty simple to me.

Jim
.

 

[TibiasDad]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever). But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy. But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

The presentation of the gospel is about our standing before God, our sinfulness in contrast to his holiness. This has to be established before anything can be discussed about the "how" questions. If there is'nt conviction of the Spirit regarding his/her guilt, everything else is meaningless, which leads to another flaw in the question, which I think is a bit of a false dilemma (which I think another person kind of alluded saying they wanted more options).

The person is an atheist and would not even consider the gospel without a belief in God, or at least something going on in his life that makes him desperate and willing to try anything to remedy his situation (such as Louis Zamperini, in Unbroken).

Presenting the gospel has many layers and the "what must we do" to be saved (Act 2:37) question is way at the end. The truth of the matter, is that if someone is genuinely convicted of their sin, then they would be willing to do whatever they had to to be saved. We then should say as Peter did, "“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."


Doug

 

[Stone-n-Steel]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever). But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy. But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

I would start by telling them to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 16:31) because "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference" (Rom 3:22).

I would also mention Eph 2:8-10 "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. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."

And Titus 2:11-14 "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."

If they are still listening I might tell them Col 3:3 "For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God."

 

[FreeGrace2]

What if you were presenting the gospel to an atheist, and the atheist said: "But I don't want to do any works."

Since works aren't part of how to get saved (see Acts 16:30-31), no problem. The real problem is that you're trying to evangelize an atheist, who doesn't even believe there is a God. So you are wasting your time. Unless and until said "fool" (Psa 14:1-3, 53:1-3) comes to his senses, there is no way he CAN be saved.

What would you say to a person like that? Would you tell him that...
1) he can still get saved anyways, or
2) he cannot get saved unless he changes his attitude?

Neither answer is correct. An atheist, by definition, cannot get saved. An atheist doesn't believe in God. Therefore, they don't believe in God's Son. Period.

If you say that he can still get saved, then you are teaching easy-believism and giving him a licence to sin (because he is not willing to do any works whatsoever).

OK, now I see your agenda. You are anti-grace by your pejorative "easy-believism" snipe. Why don't you believe what Jesus said? Matt 11:30 - For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” Or Eph 2:8,9?

And you must certainly disagree with Paul's answer to the jailer, who asked him what he MUST DO to be saved, and Paul said "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved". Acts 16:30-31

But if you say that he cannot get saved, then you are teaching him works-based salvation. So what would be the right answer?

Nothing of what you've presented would be the right answer. You can't evangelize an atheist.

Often times easy-believism and/or "licence to sin" is believed to be a heresy.

The gross error in your agenda here is obvious. There is no such "license to sin". That is ludicrous. Every human being has a sinful nature, sometimes called the "flesh" in Scripture. Therefore, no license needed.

But works-based salvation is also believed to be a heresy. But it seems like in this case you are forced to pick either one.

No. Neither one is correct.

Before even trying to evangelize an atheist, one must first begin with creation, per Rom 1:19-21. Until they understand and believe that the universe was created by God, they cannot be evangelized at all.

 

[timothyu]

We can't save anyone. We, as the parable shows, can only sow seeds. We do not water them, care for them, determine how they grow. To do so inserts our will before that of God's (the definition of sin), thus defeating the purpose of sowing in the first place. A practicing sinner cannot save a practicing sinner.

 

[FreeGrace2]

A born again Christian will want to do whatever to please God, the unregenerate man hates God and cares nothing about pleasing Him.

Then why does the Bible command believers to be holy and blameless so much?

We all know that pleases God.

Jesus died for the latter.

You mean He didn't die for the "former", the born again Christian??

If an atheist (or anyone for that matter) doesn't see himself as a helpless sinner in need of a Savior, there isn't much you can do. Conviction of sin is the Holy Spirit's job, not ours.

That was my point.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Weren't we ALL Atheists right up to the point of our Salvation?

No, the crowd in Matt 7:21-23 had all done "good works" in Jesus' name, thinking that would get them into the kingdom. And it didn't.

 

[BibleBeliever1611]

We can't save anyone. We, as the parable shows, can only sow seeds. We do not water them, care for them, determine how they grow. To do so inserts our will before that of God's (the definition of sin), thus defeating the purpose of sowing in the first place. A practicing sinner cannot save a practicing sinner.

Not true at all. The Bible specifically commands Christians to save other people (not only to sow seeds).

Jude 22-23:
"And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."