Quoting scripture to nonbelievers ...

[New_Wineskin]

Again, it depends on which version of Rom. 10.17 you read. For example the NIV says “the word of Christ”. That could not be the Bible because the New Testament had not yet been written when these words were first penned. How could the Romans have had faith without the New Testament, if the word of Christ means the Bible. Most commentators believe that the “word” (in this case rhema, a word,not logos, the word) of Christ is the Gospel of Grace.

The NLT translates this phrase “the message of the Good News”.

The CEV translates it “the message about Christ”.

~Jim

Yes , the context points more to the idea of hearing the gospel or hearing the Lord . There is no part of the context that Paul was referring to the Scriptures in that passage - especially since He was in the middle of explaining that faith came apart of the Law ( referring to the commands of the Scriptures ) .

 

[Wolf Georges]

What is the verdict, by the way? Should we be in tune with the Holy Spirit, speaking what He'd have us speak, or should we use our own judgment and attempt to save the non believer by ourselves?!

I agree with you here. We should follow the Lord's lead and do, and speak what the Holy Spirit guides us to. I don't take that to mean feeling obligated to speak Scripture or nothing. If a story that draws on my personal experience leads a person to Christ...and later on to the Scripture...why in the world should we assume that is not God working through his followers??? I never would presume that it's me doing my work...instead of me acting on God's will.

I'm not sure what anyone else suggested with regards to action without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I don't agree with your thinking on this issue. The point I was attempting to make was that it is not all or nothing.

By the way, on a lighter note...and meant with sincere good humor....doesn't your head hurt from constantly smacking yourself with that crazy little "doh" icon? I think you should go for the big "sigh" ....much easier on the cranium.

 

[Angel*Eyes]

What do you think?

~Jim

There is NO wrong or right way to witness to nonbelievers. And there is no 'one size fit all method' that is best when reaching the lost.
It is all based on the individual.

We all have different personalities, so are brains are naturally wired differently. Different people respond to different things.


I would be in error if I believed that the way that I got saved is the best way for all nonbelievers to receive salvation.


Some nonbelievers respond to scripture, some need rational and logical explanations concerning the Lord, some want to know about God's love and grace, some need a divine spiritual encounter with God or a near death experience, some need to be exposed to the sin in their lives to make them accept God's salvation.

We should be spirit-led when witnessing to nonbelievers. God knows what it takes for different people to become saved.

 

[JimB]

There is NO wrong or right way to witness to nonbelievers.
*****

Really? Have you thought this through? How about a Christian stripper who witnesses between her performances? (Real story.) Could that be a wrong way?

*****
We should be spirit-led when witnessing to nonbelievers. God knows what it takes for different people to become saved.

Really? Have you thought this through? I think we should share our faith with nonbelievers whether the Spirit leads us or not. I buy groceries when the need arises, not when the Spirit moves me.

~Jim

 

[New_Wineskin]

Of course , I have agreed with your main points of the thread . That said ...

[/color]Really? Have you thought this through? I think we should share our faith with nonbelievers whether the Spirit leads us or not. I buy groceries when the need arises, not when the Spirit moves me.

~Jim

I know that it is *not* that *I* should witness whether the Spirit leads me or not . For me , that would be living according to the Law . I want to walk according to the Spirit and not this new written code . If I start out witnessing to someone under compulsion through the Law , all I will be attempting to lead them into would be the Law as well . I would be doing the opposite of what I want that person to end up doing . I would be a hypocrite before I said a single word .

 

[JimB]

Of course , I have agreed with your main points of the thread . That said ...



I know that it is *not* that *I* should witness whether the Spirit leads me or not . For me , that would be living according to the Law . I want to walk according to the Spirit and not this new written code . If I start out witnessing to someone under compulsion through the Law , all I will be attempting to lead them into would be the Law as well . I would be doing the opposite of what I want that person to end up doing . I would be a hypocrite before I said a single word .

Huh? Sharing my faith with an unbeliever (aka, prebeliever) is one of the great joys of my life. I do not see it as a duty or a commandment; I see it as a privilege. I get to share; I don’t have to.

~Jim

 

[New_Wineskin]

Huh? Sharing my faith with an unbeliever (aka, prebeliever) is one of the great joys of my life. I do not see it as a duty or a commandment; I see it as a privilege. I get to share; I don’t have to.

~Jim

That is a completely different way of ging about it than your previous statement in the way that I view the two statements .

I think we should share our faith with nonbelievers whether the Spirit leads us or not. I buy groceries when the need arises, not when the Spirit moves me.

To me , there is a world of difference between saying that *we* *should* and *I* "get to" . The one is a commandment for all . The other is a natural desire to do so ( and , do I have to say who is giving that desire ? ) .

 

[Angel*Eyes]

Jim M, You're too funny. What an interesting response!

I think you know the answer to your question about the christian stripper. This isn't a spirit-led act.

In the OP you were wondering about quoting scriptures to nonbelievers. In my post, I was referring to the use of scripture vs. other spiritual methods of reaching others.

I think that you missed this part when you read my post.

Here is a quote from my first post:

Some nonbelievers respond to scripture, some need rational and logical explanations concerning the Lord, some want to know about God's love and grace, some need a divine spiritual encounter with God or a near death experience, some need to be exposed to the sin in their lives to make them accept God's salvation.

We should definitely share our faith when the need arises but WHAT we say or do should be spirit-led. God inspired words are really powerful. God will tell you whether or not you should quote scriptures to a particular person or not. By the way, I understand where you are coming from but grocery shopping isn't a spiritual act.

 

[JimB]

That is a completely different way of ging about it than your previous statement in the way that I view the two statements .





To me , there is a world of difference between saying that *we* *should* and *I* "get to" . The one is a commandment for all . The other is a natural desire to do so ( and , do I have to say who is giving that desire ? ) .

It all depends on what your definition of the word ‘is’ is … or ‘should’, in this case. Of course, we should share the Gospel. There are just some things we should do (like love your wife and kids, support your family, help others, pray, worship, give, edify, etc.etc.etc.) If you only do those things because you have to, I guess that would be Law. But if you do them because you want to, then I think that’s Grace. Still, however we do those things they are things we ‘should’ do. Always. In fact, the word ‘should’ occurs 221 times in the NKJV New Testament.

~Jim

 

[Trish1947]

I don't think we're supposed to wait to share the Gospel until we "look" good. If that was the case, then we are not a work in progress. And are perfect already. And if we are to wait until we look good, let's face it, some will not get to share. Say a person thinks it's o.k. to have a beer. Is he to be brought into condemnation of the unbelievers because of it? You can always find non believers that are going to judge you to see if you have the word Christian written across your forehead. And those that do that, are not interested what Christ is offering to begin with, which is forgivness of sin, and eternal life, growth comes though-out all your Christian life.. What did Jesus say, clean up the inside of the cup first, then the outside will become clean also?

 

[Svt4Him]

Again, it depends on which version of Rom. 10.17 you read. For example the NIV says “the word of Christ”. That could not be the Bible because the New Testament had not yet been written when these words were first penned. How could the Romans have had faith without the New Testament, if the word of Christ means the Bible. Most commentators believe that the “word” (in this case rhema, a word,not logos, the word) of Christ is the Gospel of Grace.

The NLT translates this phrase “the message of the Good News”.

The CEV translates it “the message about Christ”.

~Jim

Quit being pedantic Jim, you can call it the gospel, you can call it the good news, you can call it the message about Christ, which is what the whole OT is about. The good news, the message about Christ, the logos, the gospel, was spread over the world, EVEN THROUGH SOME WERE NOT READY TO HEAR, AND EVEN THOUGH THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND. This is one of those times where I think it's so clear, I can't believe we're still arguing.

 

[NacDan]

One observation from this thread:

Everyone here agrees that the Gospel of JESUS CHRIST needs to be shared. That we no longer must be slaves to the LAW, that we instead can choose to be slaves to God, free from sin, and be led by the Spirit of Truth. Amen. THAT thought is edifying to the body.

That we seem to disagree with HOW to reach the pre-believer (I reieterate, there is no such thing as a "non-believer", one day, every tongue, every tribe, every nation shall profess Jesus Christ is Lord! Amen) is a wonderful testament to HOW the Holy Spirit uses each of us to do His will and lead our brothers and sisters to the Redeemer, Jesus Christ. Amen.

Jesus taught us, "In my Father's house are many rooms, I go to prepare a place for you now." Amen.

I will be used to reach people that Jim won't be able to reach and he in turn will be used to reach other people that some of y'all won't be able to reach.

Every day, my first thoughts when I wake up are these: "Thank you LORD for today. Lord, YOUR will, NOT mine, be done. Use me as you will. Amen."

I love the WORD. I love reading it, I love studying it, and I love sharing it with others. And yes, when a scripture fits into a conversation, I share it. But I have problems (personally) with folks that have a predetermined set of questions or a script. It insulted me when people used to use their "Witnessing 101" scripts on me. I came to CHRIST when HE called me out of darkness. The guy that lead me to Christ doesn't even know it, I said the prayer hours later at home by myself, and then I waited 20 years to be baptised.

Blessed is the LAMB who takes away the sins of the world!! HOSANNA!!

Danny

 

[New_Wineskin]

It all depends on what your definition of the word ‘is’ is … or ‘should’, in this case. Of course, we should share the Gospel. There are just some things we should do (like love your wife and kids, support your family, help others, pray, worship, give, edify, etc.etc.etc.) If you only do those things because you have to, I guess that would be Law. But if you do them because you want to, then I think that’s Grace. Still, however we do those things they are things we ‘should’ do. Always. In fact, the word ‘should’ occurs 221 times in the NKJV New Testament.

~Jim

Like I said , I am not under the Law . "Should" , "must" , "have to" , "need" , "required" , "command" and so forth have the same connatation when used in this manner . It is placing an automatic law on others that one has taken for themself . Some of what you wrote could be transferred to the definition of legalism thread . If we "should" then we "will" . If we "will" , there is no reason to say that another "should" because it is a natural thing . I don't consider that what people call the "new testament" is a new written code to be looked at in the same way as the Jews looked at what people call the "old testament" . That would make Paul look a tad insane .

 

[JimB]

Quit being pedantic Jim, you can call it the gospel, you can call it the good news, you can call it the message about Christ, which is what the whole OT is about. The good news, the message about Christ, the logos, the gospel, was spread over the world, EVEN THROUGH SOME WERE NOT READY TO HEAR, AND EVEN THOUGH THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND. This is one of those times where I think it's so clear, I can't believe we're still arguing.

Me? Pedantic? Hard-headed? Stubborn? And here I thought it was you who was straining at gnats.

Remember, s4, there was no Roman Road, nor a single NT Testament scripture to quote to a non-believer at the time. At the time, THE NEW TESTAMENT HAD NOT YET BEEN WRITTEN. So, what ‘scriptures’ were the Christians Paul was addressing supposed to quote? The Law? There’s no Gospel in the Law – it is a death warrant. Anyhow, Gentiles had no grasp of the Mosaic Law (any more than a tattooed biker would have a grasp of the New Testament) and proving Christ was a fulfillment of the Law would not have resonanated with them like it would a Jew.

All the first-century Christians had to offer was “the message about Christ” and that could not have possibly been the New Testament. What they had to share was the Gospel, the good news, that Jesus Christ came into this world to save sinners … and their story.

To quote a great sage, “This is one of those times where I think it's so clear; I can't believe we're still arguing.”

Seriously, though, s4 we are probably at a place where we need to agree to disagree and part from this subject friends. Thanx for sharpening my iron. You have made some valid points.

~Jim

 

[Johnny Be Good]

Basically, if we agree that it's the Good News about Jesus that it is which we are commissioned to share, aren't we forgetting that Jesus IS the Word. He's the Word made flesh. If we share Jesus, we ARE sharing the Word--and, of course, if we're sharing the Word, we're sharing Jesus. Any way you slice it, we're sharing the Word.

The point is that if we know how to present the Gospel, or if we have a technique that we prefer to use, we absolutely must make sure that what we're doing is in agreement with the Holy Spirit. *Actually, it's dangerous to even walk that edge--go to the Holy Spirit for guidance first, before we decide to do things the way we want to do them. That's what gets us in trouble in life. If we do not submit, serve and purposely make Jesus the center of our lives, we'll crash and burn...so to speak. In the case of witnessing, we'll take others with us. There is a way that seems right to a man--but in the end leads to death. Obedience is serious business.

 

[amorosi]

Basically, if we agree that it's the Good News about Jesus that it is which we are commissioned to share, aren't we forgetting that Jesus IS the Word. He's the Word made flesh. If we share Jesus, we ARE sharing the Word--and, of course, if we're sharing the Word, we're sharing Jesus. Any way you slice it, we're sharing the Word.

The point is that if we know how to present the Gospel, or if we have a technique that we prefer to use, we absolutely must make sure that what we're doing is in agreement with the Holy Spirit. *Actually, it's dangerous to even walk that edge--go to the Holy Spirit for guidance first, before we decide to do things the way we want to do them. That's what gets us in trouble in life. If we do not submit, serve and purposely make Jesus the center of our lives, we'll crash and burn...so to speak. In the case of witnessing, we'll take others with us. There is a way that seems right to a man--but in the end leads to death. Obedience is serious business.

In meekness we are to "instruct" those who oppose themselves !!

Instruct them ??

from where--the newspapers, my experience in life, that christian author's book i just read ??

No

From the Word--we instruct--and remain "apt" to teach

to teach ?? but from where--do we teach them ??

UMMMM audio tapes, put a video on for em, play music, that prophecy chart on the wall ??

No teach them from the word, like philip took the eunuch right back to that passage he was reading from,and sought to bring enlightment !!

Our responsibilty is to teach and minister=========and he God --then determines, wether he turns the light switch on, to that unlearned person,that sinner, and that non-discerning profligate person.

God gives the increase--our responsibilty--is to preach and tell them about Jesus--knowing he father-- God is the one--who ultimately gives--repentance to the acknowledgement of the truth

Jesus gave nicodemus the word, and preached to him, about the born again experience, and his own need to be born of water and of the spirit of God.

He Jesus didn't pull him aside and say ...now listen here...you won't understand a single word i will say--so i will simply share with you about my miracles and the those i ministered deliverance to--and how i turned water into wine etc etc

And this will have a much greater liklihood--of you-- realizing exactly who i am---and why i came into the world.

 

[Johnny Be Good]

...what ‘scriptures’ were the Christians Paul was addressing supposed to quote? The Law? There’s no Gospel in the Law – it is a death warrant.

wow. There just isn't...I can't believe...I just don't know where to begin with that.

--wait--I just asked the Holy Spirit where to begin and He said, "Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law." It all points to Him.

To quote a great sage, “This is one of those times where I think it's so clear; I can't believe we're still arguing.”

Seriously, though, s4 we are probably at a place where we need to agree to disagree and part from this subject friends. Thanx for sharpening my iron. You have made some valid points.

~Jim

You can not see through the scales on your eyes: you place your trust in, and rely upon, your own reasoning--your follow your own will--and promote this philosophy in most everything you write here. When you need groceries, by God, you're going to buy them. You seem to SAY the right things and use the Word in convincing ways, but you continue to state publically that it's your own reasoning that you trust--like you have over and over in this thread. You don't come right out and say that we should not submit and acknowledge God first in all things--you just don't promote acknowledging God in all things! You instruct that we ought to reason and figure it out on our own, as you have here again in this thread. You submit to and acknowledge the result derived from your own reasoning. You can not see that you reject submission to God's authority--re-read your own posts if you think I'm calling you names again. I'm not. I'm stating truth--go back and read your own words! It's good to state truth. It's bad to state and promote disobedience and promote self rule through trust in your own reasoning instead of going to God in all things. When you hold this position, you wind up purposely leading others off the narrow road toward agreement with you.

Is Jesus Lord?

 

[JimB]

[/color][/size][/font]

wow. There just isn't...I can't believe...I just don't know where to begin with that.

--wait--I just asked the Holy Spirit where to begin and He said, "Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law." It all points to Him.

*****

Johnny, Calm down. Take a deep breath. Count to ten.


Man, you have such an immature and abrasive way about you I even hesitate to respond to your attacks but …


--Wait-- I just asked the Holy Spirit where to begin and He said, "Jesus is the END of the Law to everyone who believes" (Romans 10.4). You’re right, it does all point to Him.

~Jim

 

[Johnny Be Good]

Johnny, Calm down. Take a deep breath. Count to ten.


Man, you have such an immature and abrasive way about you I even hesitate to respond to your attacks but …


--Wait-- I just asked the Holy Spirit where to begin and He said, "Jesus is the END of the Law to everyone who believes" (Romans 10.4). You’re right, it does all point to Him.

~Jim

If I didn't know any better, I'd think you were calling me names, Jim.

Oh--and you failed to answer my question...

You can not see through the scales on your eyes: you place your trust in, and rely upon, your own reasoning--your follow your own will--and promote this philosophy in most everything you write here. When you need groceries, by God, you're going to buy them. You seem to SAY the right things and use the Word in convincing ways, but you continue to state publically that it's your own reasoning that you trust--like you have over and over in this thread. You don't come right out and say that we should not submit and acknowledge God first in all things--you just don't promote acknowledging God in all things! You instruct that we ought to reason and figure it out on our own, as you have here again in this thread. You submit to and acknowledge the result derived from your own reasoning. You can not see that you reject submission to God's authority--re-read your own posts if you think I'm calling you names again. I'm not. I'm stating truth--go back and read your own words! It's good to state truth. It's bad to state and promote disobedience and promote self rule through trust in your own reasoning instead of going to God in all things. When you hold this position, you wind up purposely leading others off the narrow road toward agreement with you.

Is Jesus Lord?

 

[JimB]

*****
Oh--and you failed to answer my question...

That’s because I didn’t read past your insults, Johnny. I was turned off before I got started. That’s what’s wrong with your style of confrontation. No one has to listen to insults.

I refuse to answer questions while you are verbally abusing me. Who do you think you are, Johnny Be Nasty?

~Jim