As a false convert for over 20 years of my life I know the dangers first hand of the “sinner’s prayer” and the hellish teachings of “carnal Christianity” and the unBiblical phrases like “ask Jesus into your heart”. I too was told by many that since I repeated a prayer and was “in the club” that no matter how I lived my life I was still heaven bound. Salvation is not only from the penalty of sin but from the power of sin! Salvation is the product of being born again – being a new creation with a new heart and new desires and a God-given hatred for sin.
Friends of this blog, if you don’t watch a single video I have posted I urge you to watch this video. This man’s testimony is spot on. This will cause many to shudder and my prayer is that if you have trusted in a prayer, walking an isle and profess to be a Christian yet live a life of sin and love the world you need to examine yourself and cast yourself on the Savior Jesus Christ. If you are a pastor, teacher of evangelist who has watered down the gospel and holds to the hellish teaching of carnal Christianity I urge you to examine the Scriptures and repent.
Saved from the Sinner’s Prayer from I’ll Be Honest on Vimeo.
Related posts:
Excellent video. Excellent testimony. I’m pleased to see a frontal assault taking place against the “sinners prayer” from many sources.
It’s a terrible tragedy, and one that has given those who believe one can lose salvation the ammunition to claim their “see! some fall away after being saved!” heresy. They never even consider that conversion never actually took place .. that they were mere words (see Matt 15:8). It’s a prolific heresy.
I am thrilled you have come to Christ! But, my friend, when Peter denied the Lord Jesus, He was given by Christ the opportunity to re-dedicate his life to Him. Christ asked him three times, “Do you love me?” The response of Peter was to re-dedicate what he’d given to Christ before. We must DAILY take up our cross and follow Jesus. Every day that you do this, you are re-dedicating yourself to Him. When you suggest that there is no such thing as re-dedicating yourself to Christ, – then you are saying that when someone makes a horrible mistake like Peter made – that they were never saved to begin with. That, is horribly wrong! Thomas, when he doubted – was given by Christ the opportunity to rededicate himself to his Lord. The scriptures are abundant with examples. You also seem to suggest that Christians can live above sin. Nothing could be further from the truth. The scriptures remind us, “if we sin, we have an advocate with the Father.” Christians can and do fall away for periods in their life. It does not mean they were never saved. It does mean that they are still very human. Even Paul admitted that he did what he didn’t want to do and did not do what he did want to do! This is why Paul said, “I buffet my body and keep it under subjection.”
I’m grateful for your testimony. Your glowing love for Jesus, I believe, is what motivated the video. But, if you think that now you are immune from sin..my friend, “pride goeth before destruction” and “he that thinketh he standeth – take heed, lest he fall!”
Hi Steven.
Thanks so much for commenting. Allow me to respond to your comment.
Peter’s reinstatement I would not call a “rededication” but repentance. Christians are not called to rededicate our lives as if there are times we are not in Him and times that we are. We are always in Him. However we are called to constant repentance. The Christian life is a life of constant repentance from sin. Why? Because like Peter, we do sin – and at times grievously.
That leads me to your next comment on a sinless life. I would never want to teach or insinuate that the Christian life can reach perfectionism in this lifetime. Far from it. Christians sin everyday and only by His grace do we now have the power to say no to sin but we are still in the flesh and the sinful struggles still exist today and that is why repentance and confession of sin (1 John 1:8-9) is so importance and even possible because we are in Christ.
I believe that my point is that we put way too much emphasis in the church on “rededication” to Christ. I frankly don’t even know what that means. It’s like the folks who get rebaptized over and over again. Why? I believe it’s a misunderstanding of what true salvation is. You’re either saved or you’re not. I don’t like the term “rebaptized” at all. It’s not Biblical. For example, I was baptized at 13 and was not saved. I felt I was and everyone was telling me I was saved but my feelings and other people’s affirmations mean absolutely nothing. There was no changed life, no growing in holiness and no love for the commandments of my Lord. These, according to 1 John, are the signs of true salvation. So when the Lord truly saved me I was not “rededicating” or “rebaptized” I was baptized once and for all. In the same way I believe we have distorted “re-dedication” to undergird the false teachings of carnal Christianity.
I appreciate your comments brother and your kind way of addressing them in a Christ-like manner. It’s so often that there are no gentle rebukes by other believers on blogs and it’s refreshing to see on. I think it’s just a misunderstanding of rededication and repentance and I assure you that I do not teach perfectionism – for my own life would destroy that teaching. :-) However, feel free to respond if you still disagree.
Soli Deo Gloria!
Thanks John! Appreciate your visiting my blog! Soli Deo Gloria!
@John
I feel you have nailed it on the head, while neglecting one primary problem within Christianity and the Church. One will continue in a state of perplexity when not realizing HOW MUCH The Words of God written in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are perverted by Christian doctrines and teachings. What Christianity has taught in their understanding of scripture is perverted due to the foundational errors within it’s origins that came from Rome = The Catholic Church. When you have an understanding of scripture WITHOUT the wisdom of G-D, that HE mandated for mankind to follow (the ways in which HE said one should walk and identify themself with The One True G-D) found in HIS WORDS written in GN, EX, LE, NU and DT you will have what we see in Christianity today……….perversion of the FOUNDATIONAL kind.
Will G-D have mercy? We trust HE will! However this does not negate our responsibility to seek foundational truth of the integrity of G-D’s Word and dispelling the Hellenistic paganism from Rome in which Christianity is founded. We need ALL TRUTH, not just portions in which we choose to embrace, while maintaining a resistance to foundational errors of a magnanimously fatal outcome we find in the teachings of Christian.
All The Best In Your Search For Purity Of Truth. Heeding: there’s nothing “New” about the truth or G-D’s covenant with mankind. The only thing “New” is what is being taught as the ONLY truth, “Newly” created in Rome that is damning the world from G-D’s covenantal relationship HE desires with all peoples.
I stumbled on this, well as I think about it I suppose that I have been led. A friend posted the link on facebook and then I googled the subject. There is a good counterpoint episode? that discusses this and I have found several other blogs and posts. Counterpoint was the only one that did a “wrap-up” so to speak. I could not glean from you testimony what was needed for salvation. What I got was 1)hear it 2)the holy spirit moves within you 3)speak it/repent 4)baptize. I have personally struggled with some bits. Can you enlighten me on the “elect”? Meaning that G-D has chosen those that he wants already (this makes no sense to me, cuz why preach) and that know one can deny HIM. Meaning, you cannot deny salvation. If it is presented, then you have no choice but to accept. Oh, and what would be a good starter book to help clear this up?
Something with solid biblical references to passages instead of piecs of verses. Sorry to go on, lots of stuff. Thanks, John
John,
Thank you so much for visiting and taking the time to post your comment and question. I’d like to answer your question as completely as possible. The doctrine of election is a Biblical doctrine that teaches that before the foundation of the world God has in His sovereignty chosen those who will come to faith in Christ by His grace. Ephesians chapter 2 is an excellent chapter to read on this doctrine. You see, if we are born spiritually dead (which the Bible clearly teaches) then no one would turn to God on their own without God first turning their heart of stone to a heart of flesh. This my friend is amazing grace. The fact that God would save anyone is grace. Many debate this doctrine but it simply comes down to the important question: what is the condition of man. If we believe that man is born good or neutral (which the Bible clearly does not teach) then we are thrown into false teachings of man having the ability to come to God on his own. However, if we hold to what Scripture clearly teaches – that man is born evil (Psalm 51:5) and spiritually dead (Ephesians 2) then only God can cause us to be born from above (John 3) and open our eyes to His glory and then we will find Him irresistible and come to Him.
The question you have about evangelism is a common one when someone first begins to investigate the true teachings of Scripture with regards to reformed theology. They often think to themselves that if God has already chosen who will come to faith then why share the gospel? The gospel must be shared for several reasons: 1) we are simply commanded to (Matthew 28:18-20), 2) faith comes by hearing the word of Christ (Romans 10:17) and 3) the Holy Spirit uses the Gospel to bring about faith and repentance. So a true Calvinist will hold fast to evangelism and will frankly be very passionate about sharing the gospel knowing that the work is not in vain – that God has His secret elect that will respond to the gospel call. Only the errant “hyper-Calvinists” will hold that one should not evangelize. Unfortunately this false teaching by “hyper-calvinists” has labeled inaccurately the true teaching of reformed theology. This hyper-calvinistic view of election is far from the true teachings of Scripture and reformed theology.
You asked about some good books on this subject. First and foremost be sure to spend much time and prayer in Scripture. Especially spend time in all of God’s Word to see throughout all of the pages the electing love of God. I don’t want to sound preachy but we must spend most of our time in God’s Word and then turn to other books for commentary and help.
That being said, here are some excellent books that I would highly recommend:
“What is Reformed Theology” by RC Sproul
“Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace?” by James Boice
“Chosen by God” by RC Sproul ** Highly Recommended!**
“Finally Alive” by John Piper
In addition, one of the finest websites dedicated to reformed theology is Monergism.com. Here is the link to view their section on the doctrine of election:
http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Election/
These books will give you an excellent, solid understanding of the doctrines of grace (unconditional election being on of them) written by sound theologians that can be trusted.
I’m sure that I have not even begun to hit the surface of this glorious doctrine of election but I want to make sure that I make this important information as clear as possible. Hopefully some other folks will chime in with their book recommendations and Biblical responses to your question. Feel free to post another comment or email me directly if you have any questions.
May the Lord grant you wisdom from above as you seek Him!
Soli Deo Gloria!
You’re nuts! Get help. May you come to know God as you should.
Hi Chuck,
Would you mind sharing with me how I should come to know God?
Jay, thank you very much for your testimony, it’s great and honest. I totally agree that the so called “sinner’s prayer” often does much more harm than good, especially when some churches refuse to administer baptism to those who have not prayed that “prayer” in public – to me it is nothing but salvation by works, not by faith, and have no place in Biblical Christianity. And I do feel sad that we, Evangelical Christians, simply introduced new “sacraments” that have no Biblical basis.
Just one thing (please be patient with my English, it is not my native language). Apostle Paul in Romans, Chapter 7, speaks about the spiritual war between the new nature of a believer and the flesh, that is the old, sinful nature. He also rebukes the Churches in Corinth and other cities for tolerance of sin, legalism and many other things – but he still addresses them as saints, that is, genuine believers. He even asks to accept a brother that was excommunicated for adultery – without any reference to his “unregenerate nature”.
Here is what I want to say: our old nature does not simply disappear (I wish it were…) at the moment of conversion, it still tries to stand its ground and wage war against the Spirit. It takes years to overcome the consequences of life without God, to get rid of the “favorite” sins and to learn to resist temptations. We’ve got to realize how wicked our heart, how desperately corrupted our nature, and how powerful sin within us. I can’t help quoting John MacArthur here:
“So sin is powerful, and sin is near–even within us, and sin does not separate itself but is mingled into everything. It is interwoven with everything in our lives. The best that we do is somehow corrupted in some way–large or small by a taint of self-will, or self-pleasure, or self-aggrandizement, or self-righteousness, or self-gain, or whatever. And so we become easily entangled, and as I said, there are certain sins that more easily entangle us, each of us, than others do” (“Dealing with Habitual Sins”, http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/80-106.htm).
So I would be careful to pronounce judgement on those who, for example, have been fighting with an addiction or a certain habit. Yes, some people may mistakingly believe they are Christians while they are not, but some honest and godly Christian may suffer from the power of sin and doubt their salvation.
This is how I see it. Thank you again.
Hi Ingvar,
Thanks so much for your post and for visiting the site. I agree completely with your comment. I believe that the misunderstanding is that a true Christian will battle with sin and make war with sin and thus not be able to live a lifestyle of sin. This completely agrees with Scripture. (1 John) However, a false believer will not have a battle with sin and they will often be able to live in a lifestyle of sin because they believe they are a “carnal Christian” or they are being told by others they are saved because of something they did (walk an isle, pray a prayer, etc.) The key here is that when someone is truly regenerated the Holy Spirit will indwell them and the battle over sin begins. Yes, we will wage war with sin in the flesh until Christ returns but that is the focus: there is a war.
Sin in the life of a believer (not an unrepentant lifestyle of sin) can and does often cause one to lose their assurance of salvation. A true believer cannot and does not lose their salvation but their assurance can be lost until that sin is rightly repented of.
Again, thanks so much for taking the time to post your comment on my blog!
Soli Deo Gloria!
Thanks for telling it the way it really is. I was much older than you and had been in the church much longer before I knew that I was a sinner and was miraculously saved by God’s grace and had to repent of the pride in my life as well. Your testimony has many similarities to mine.
God took that anger and pride from me and I finally knew what it really was to be a believer in His Word and that the sacrifice He made with His Son on Calvary was for my sin! I am a sinner saved by His wonderful grace. I don’t know why he would choose me of all sinners, but I am forever thankful for the peace that only He can give.
It is so hard to live in this world of unbelief and see the beliefs of the world flowing into the churches like a mighty river and washing out the Truth of the Word of God with Man’s formulas such as “the sinner’s prayer”.
Thank you for speaking out, and God bless you!
We do have a preacher that preaches the Word and not the formulas, I thank God for that, but there are few around!
Kathy
Hi Kathy,
What a wonderful testimony you have – all glory and honor to the Lamb who was worthy to be slain! What a joy also to hear that you are in a church where the pastor truly proclaims the full gospel of Christ – they are few indeed!
May the Lord grant conform you more and more into the image of Jesus Christ!
Soli Deo Gloria!
- Jay
I too was a false convert believing that by praying the sinner’s prayer and then living without turly knowing Christ as my savior I grew up in rebellion. Finally, many years later, Jay finally covninced me that the sinner’s prayer was not true salvation and I came to be completely dependent upon Jesus Christ for all that I do.
The one comment that Jay made in response to a child walking the aisle and repeating the sinner’s prayer is “Time will tell”. In my case, time did tell. It told me that even though I knew Jesus Christ, I actually did NOT know him. Now, I believe that I do know him.
Tim Porter
Thanks for sharing your testimony Tim! All glory to Christ for His sovereign grace and infinite mercy and love.
Soli Deo Gloria!
Thanks for putting the video and this site together. I posted it on my facebook page. It’s important that we help and support each other, those who have been saved from the false doctrine and have been awakened by God to see it. It’s impossible not to to preach the true gospel, but hard and frustrating to do so give we live in a world of the lost, and espically hard to preach to those who think they are saved on there own merits, or intelligence to be able to come to Gop on their own. Thanks, and looking forward to meeting you some day.
Hi Andy,
Thanks so much for stopping by and for your comment. I agree with you that one of the major problems with Evangelicalism today is a lack of pure and true gospel proclamation. Just wanted to point out too that I didn’t make this video – it was created by the fine folks over at illbehonest.com.
Soli Deo Gloria,
Jay
Ya, the more I got looking into your site I realized the video wasn’t yours, but still a good one that goes with this post. I’ll be visiting this site on a regular basis. Thanks again.
I sent it to our ‘pastor’ and a bunch of people at the ‘church’. Thank you for posting this.
Some commentators might strongly oppose the request of the receipt of the Holy Spirit for the fact that the prophecy in John 16:7 pertaining to the receipt of the Holy Spirit should have been fulfilled in Acts 2 by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit during the Pentecost. They treat John 4:10, John 6:32-34 and Luke 11:13 to be applicable only before the day of Pentecost and all the events as mentioned in the book of Acts to be in transitional period and these give them the conclusion that the request of the Holy Spirit should be nullified currently. Discuss.
The comment that, John 16:7 is applicable to Acts 2 in which the disciples received the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the current practice of requesting of the Holy Spirit should be in vain, has been found to be unjustifiable in the Gospel for the following reasons:
a) John 16:7 mentions that the Holy Spirit had to be descended upon the disciples when Jesus was glorified and it should have been fulfilled in Acts 2. However, neither John 16:7 nor any verses from the Bible does mention that the practice of requesting of the Holy Spirit should be abandoned after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts 2. By asserting that the requesting of the Holy Spirit should be nullified after the day of Pentecost, is simply the act of making presumption in which it is not stated in the Bible. Or in other words, they simply add words of presumption that is not even stated in the Bible. We have been warned in the Bible not to abuse the Scripture by adding or subtracting words. Unless a verse or sentence has been stated clearly elsewhere in the Bible that requesting of the Holy Spirit has to be ceased or to be nullified after the day of Pentecost, it should then be rational to conclude that requesting of the Holy Spirit is redundant and not be to exercised in the future.
b)Some commentators might suggest that the phrase, they were come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, as mentioned in Acts 8:15 to be the exceptional case with their presumption that this event should fall during transitional period. However, neither Acts 8 nor any verses from the Bible that mentions that Acts 8 should be meant for transitional period and that should be the ultimate reason for the request of the Holy Spirit. By asserting that the event as mentioned in Acts 8 to be the transitional period has caused one to add words of presumption that is not even mentioned in the Scripture. What if the event as mentioned in Acts 8:15 in reality should not be meant for transitional period, the phrase, they were come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, in Acts 8:15 would give the impression that God demands the practice of the praying of the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts 2. As nothing is mentioned in Acts 8 that it is meant for transitional period to excuse people in the future to pray for the receipt of the Holy Spirit other than the presumptuous thought from some commentators, the intention to do away the requesting of the Holy Spirit with excuses to be give, would ultimately cause many people to be in the doom with their presumption that they have received the Holy Spirit and yet in reality, they might not have.
c) Some commentators might have suggested that the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2 is meant to be either the spoken words raised during the transitional period or for other excuse reason (such as, this is meant to be for exceptional case due to they had received or known merely John’s baptism) to discourage people from requesting the receipt of the Holy Spirit. However, neither Acts 19 nor any verses in the Bible does mention that Acts 19 should be meant for transitional period. The commentators simply add words of assumption to discourage people from requesting of the Holy Spirit. What if Acts 19 should not be considered as transitional period or it was not due to other reason (such as they had merely received John’s baptism) in realtiy, those people, that have this presumptuous thought, have undoubtedly added words of presumption in which they are not mentioned elsewhere in the Bible. What if praying for the receipt of the Holy Spirit has to be considered as part of the plan for God’s salvation, the intention to avoid and mislead many not to pray to receive the Holy Spirit, would cause many to be in the doom for not to be born again.
d)Neither John 4:10 nor John 6:32-34 nor Luke 11:13 mentions that the practice of the requesting of the Holy Spirit should be ceased on the day of Pentecost, it is irrational to add words of presumption in the Bible in which it is not even stated. John 16:7 emphasizes on the outpouring of the Holy Spirit when Jesus was glorified and nothing is mentioned vividly in the Bible about the cessation of the request of the Holy Spirit after the Pentecost. The commentators simply derive conclusion through guessing work that the practice of the requesting of the Holy Spirit should have been ceased after the Pentecost or the so-called, transitional period, that is defined by them, but not mentioned in the Bible.
Any mis-interpretation on the part of the way to salvation would simply lead people to presume that they are saved and have received the Holy Spirit without the realisation of the possible absence of the Holy Spirit within their bodies.
Some commentators might use the following verses to oppose the use of sinner’s prayer with the excuse that the Holy Spirit should be with them simply by mentioning that they do confess that Jesus is the Son of God and their recognition about the resurrection of Jesus:
1 John 4:15, “Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.”
Romans 10:9, “That if thou shalt confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
Discuss.
At a glance, the phrase, Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, in 1 John 4:15 seems to imply that all those people, that confess Jesus as the Son of God, must have received the Holy Spirit. However, the following are the two distinctive cases from the Bible that have brought us to the attention that not all the people, that proclaim Jesus is the Son of God, have received the Holy Spirit:
a) Instances below that give us the implication that people could proclaim Jesus to be the Son of God even prior to the resurrection of Jesus:
i) Matthew 14:33, “Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, of a truth thou art the Son of God.”
ii) Matthew 27:54, “Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.”
iii) Mark 15:39, “And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.”
iv) John 1:49, “Nathamael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the king of Israel.”
v) John 11:27, “She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”
The following are the extracts to prove that those people, that are mentioned in Matthew 14:33, 27:54; John 1:49, 11:27, and Mark 15:39, did not receive the Holy Spirit prior to the resurrection of Jesus:
i) John 7:39, “(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive, for the Holy Ghost was not yet [given]: because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)”
ii) John 16:7, “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”
Despite Matthew 14:33, 27:54; Mark 15:39; John 1:49 and John 11:27 were the events occurred prior to the day that Jesus was glorified and these people should not have received the Holy Spirit in accordance to John 7:39 and 16:7, yet they could proclaim Jesus as the Son of God at the absence of the Holy Spirit. This gives the ultimate conclusion that those people, that could proclaim Jesus to be the Son of God in this modern society, do not give any strong proof that they have God to be dwelt within their bodies.
b) Instances from the Scripture to prove that even demons could comment that Jesus is the Son of God and yet God do not dwell within their bodies. The following are the extracts:
i) Matthew 8:29, “And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?”
ii) Mark 3:11, “And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.”
iii) Luke 4:41, “And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuke them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.”
iv) Luke 8:28, “When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, what have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most High? I beseech thee, torment me not.”
From the above explanations and the extracts, these could easily arrive at the conclusion that it is irrational to determine whether a person has received the Holy Spirit by simply hearing him/her in proclaiming that Jesus is the Son of God.
As it is irrational to determine whether a person has received the Holy Spirit simply by hearing him/her in proclaiming that Jesus is the Son of God, does it imply that 1 John 4:15 is contradictory to Matthew 14:33, 27:54; John 1:49, 11:27, and Mark 15:39? No, it is irrational to jump into this conclusion since if the word, confess, in 1 John 4:15 is be interpreted with broader definition that it should be accompanied with action instead of restricting to merely mouth-to-mouth confession. When the word, confess, in 1 John 4:15 has been interpreted with broader definition to include our sincere action towards God in treating and letting Jeus to be truly the Son of God to reign in our lives, we then would discover 1 John 4:15 does not contradict itself with other verses in the Bible. Or in other words, the person that confess that Jesus is the Son of God need to have high respect of Jesus and to have Him to come into his/her life to take control of him/her. Could a person be saved simply by proclaiming Jesus to be the Son of God and his/her Lord and yet refusing to allow Him to come into his/her life and to have Him to be the King to reign in his/her life and that is what God desires for.
James 2:29 provides the truth that the devils even believe in God and yet they tremble as a result of their faith without action. A person might proclaim that he/she believes in Jesus to be the Son of God and his/her Lord and yet God is interested whether his faith is accompanied with his willingness to accept Him to be his Personal Saviour and Lord. The following are the extracts for James 2:19-24 and these are self-explanatory:
James 2:19-24, “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”
Thanks and best regards.
Some commentators might strongly condemn sinner’s prayer by mentioning that this is not found anywhere in the Bible. Discuss.
Let’s look into all the factors that should contribute towards sinner’s prayer prior to looking into the matter above:
a) Repentance: Repentance is significant for non-Christians for their conversions. The intention to do away repentance among non-Christians would not cause those that persist in sinning without repentant heart, to be born again due to God regard not their prayer. The following are the extracts:
Psalms 66:18, “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.”
Isaiah 1:15, “And ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.”
Isaiah 59:1-2, “Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”
Nevertheless, non-Christians have to repent from sinning, such as, abandoning in worshipping idols, and etc. prior to their commencement of Sinner’s prayer or else their prayer would simply be in vain.
b) Confession of Sins: The introduction of confession of sins in sinner’s prayer among non-Christians would certainly direct their mind to the right path in acknowledging and confessing their sins before God for the claim of the promise of sin’s cleansing as spelt out below:
1 John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
The same is mentioned in Proverb 28:13, “(that) He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.”
Bearing in mind that iniquities are the barriers that cause non-Christians not to reach out to God since God regard not iniquities. The following are the extracts for detailed examination and analyses:
Psalms 5:4-5, “For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee…thou hatest all workers of iniquity.”
Psalms 7:11, “…God is angry with the wicked every day.”
Isaiah 59:1-2, “Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”
Proverbs 15:26, “The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the Lord…”
Proverbs 15:29, “The Lord is far from the wicked…”
Would this imply that the verses above contradict the phrase, For God so loved the world, in John 3:16? No, the verses above do not contradict the phrase, For God so loved the world, in John 3:16 provided that the word, world, in John 3:16 has to exclude evil deeds, disobedience to God and all kinds of iniquities. Without excluding iniquities from the definition of the word, world, the interpretation would turn up to be unjustifiable that God love people to commit iniquities, such as, stirring up violence, havoc and etc. in the society.
The confession of sins in sinner’s prayer enables non-Christian to express their iniquities towards God to ease the sins’ cleansing especially sins have caused them to be separated from God as mentioned in Isaiah 59:1-2 and that is why there is a need for them to confess their sins before God for sins’ cleansing for the claim of the promise as mentioned in 1 John 1:9, “(that) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Romans 4:7, “[saying], Blessed [are] they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.”
What if non-Christians insist their perfection without sins, would their sins be forgiven? 1 John 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” As the phrase, the truth is not in us, is mentioned in 1 John 1:8 with the phrase, If we say that we have no sin, it implies that God’s truth is not with non-Christians if they insist their perfection without sins. As God’s truth is not with them if they insist they are without sins, there should not be any possibility that God would be with them or their sins could be forgiven. The same is mentioned in 1 John 1:10, “(that) If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”
The reason for all non-Christians need to express their sins towards God by confession through sinner’s prayer, has been spelt out as follows:
Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”
Romans 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:”
Romans 5:18-19, “Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation;…For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners,…”
c) Faith has to be exercised throughout sinner’s prayer. This is due to non-Christians would not expect to receive any from sinner’s prayer if they do not exercise faith throughout/after sinner’s prayer, such as, they do not believe their sins have been forgiven; they do not believe that the Holy Spirit has come into their bodies, and etc.; after sinner’s prayer. The following are the extracts:
James 1:6-8, “But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.”
d) Sinner’s prayer should also include forgiveness of sins of others. This is due to God demand non-Christians to forgive others prior to granting the forgiveness of their sins. The following are the supporting verses:
Matthew 6:14-15, “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses; neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”
Mark 11:25-26, “And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”
The Lord allow confession of sins to be included in prayer. The following are the extracts for proves:
Matthew 6:12, “(mentions that) And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.”
Luke 11:4, “And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us.”
Nevertheless, there is a preference to include the request of the forgiveness of sins for others during sinner’s prayer.
e) Request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit:
John 4:10, “ Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.”
John 6:32-34, “ Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.”
Luke 11:13, “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?”
Acts 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.”
John 4:10, 6:32-34 and Luke 11:13 above are the spoken words from Jesus that direct non-Christians for the request of the Holy Spirit. Many commentators say that the request of the Holy Spirit should have ceased on the day of Pentecost. However, none of the verses in the Bible do mention the request of the Holy Spirit should have ceased after the Pentecost in Acts 2. What if the praying for the receipt of the Holy Spirit should not cease in reality and that the event in the book of Acts 19 was not the transitional period, those people that refuse to pray for the receipt of the Holy Spirit will be in the doom and the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Spirit since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2 would turn up to be the warning among non-Christians for their earnest request of the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
The following are the extracts that none of us should add or remove any words from the Scripture:
Proverbs 30:6, “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.”
Ecclesiastes 3:14, “I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be forever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.”
Isaiah 34:16, “Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: For my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.”
Isaiah 40:8, “…the word of our God shall stand for ever.”
e) To include acknowledging Jesus’ resurrection in sinner’s prayer: This is by virtue of Jesus’ resurrection is part of the plan for salvation. The following is the extract:
Romans 10:9, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
After reading the above factors that have direct impact upon salvation. Now, let’s meditate Acts 2:16 as well as 8:15 cautiously below for the reply that some commentators have brought out to do away sinner’s prayer with the excuse that it is not mentioned in the Bible:
Acts 2:16, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The word, and, in Acts 2:16 has separated the word, baptized, and the phrase, wash away thy sins, it implies the two distinctive roles for baptism and the washing away of sins. The phrase, washing away thy sins, in Acts 2:16 implies sins cleansing to be exercised prior to the receipt of the Holy Spirit. The only event in the book of Acts that has mentioned about the sin’s cleansing is from Acts 2:16 and it is not found elsewhere. However, nothing is mentioned anywhere in the Book of Acts other than Acts 2:16 pertaining to sin’s cleansing, does not imply the disciples did not perform the same in other chapters. What if the practice of sin’s cleansing was exercised in other events and yet it is not mentioned in the book of Acts, the intention to do away confession of sins in this modern society would result in sins remaining among non-Christians. As sins remain among them, would you think God would answer their prayer to be born again? Meditate Isaiah 59:1-2 for the consideration.
Acts 8:15, “Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit:” The phrase, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, in Acts 8:15 implies that the disciples did request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit for non-Christians. The only event in the book of Acts that has mentioned about the praying of the receipt of the Holy Spirit could be found in Acts 8:15. What if the practice of praying for the receipt of the Holy Spirit was exercised in other events in the book of Acts and yet it is not mentioned at all, the intention to do away the practice in praying for the receipt of the Holy Spirit in this modern society would result that many would fall as a result of the absence of the Holy Spirit. These people would simply live in the world of presumption that they have been saved and have received the Holy Spirit and ignorantly to be waiting for condemnation.
Meditate Matthew 7:21 and 23 carefully below prior to abandoning the practice of sinner’s prayer:
Matthew 7:21, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.”
Matthew 7:23, “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
Those people that proclaim Jesus is Lord as mentioned in Matthew 7:21 might have great faith for their salvation and yet Matthew 7:23 gives us the warning of their rejection and these give us the hint, that not all that proclaim Jesus is LORD, are Christians.
Did God put all the messages inside one sentence so as to conclude everything?
Isaiah 28:9-11, “Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? [them that are] weaned from the milk, [and] drawn from the breasts. For precept [must be] upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.” As the phrase, here a little and there a little, is mentioned in Isaiah 28:9-10, it implies that God might not express all his message by a single sentence. What he did in the Bible was simply a message stated here a little and there a little and we have to gather all these messages from different parts of the Bible to form a full message of God.
As God use different verses here and there to form a full message of God, there should not be any reason for one to use a single verse, such as, 1 John 4:15 or John 3:16 to conclude the message of God without gathering all the information from the rest of the Bible.
The emphasis that non-Christians have to be born again is based merely upon the following extracts:
John 3:5-7, “Jesus answered, Vereily, Verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Romans 8:9, “(has spelt out clearly that)…if any man have not the Spirit of God, he is none of his…”
let’s examine the book of Acts cautiously below for the reply that some commentators have brought out to do away sinner’s prayer with the excuse that it is not mentioned in the Bible:
1) Acts 6:6-7, “Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.”
As the phrase, the disciples multiplied…greatly, is mentioned in Acts 6:7, it implies the great number of non-Christians were converted to Christianity. Nothing is mentioned in Acts 6:6-7 or elsewhere that these people did repent from sinning prior to their conversion. One must not be quick in jumping into the conclusion by using this event to support that non-Christians need not to repent in order to be born again or else he/she is simply adding words of assumption in which it is not stated in Acts 6;6-7. As nothing is mentioned in Acts 6:6-7 that they did repent from sin, there are two possibilities with regard to their conversion. First assumption is that they might have repented from sinning and yet it was not mentioned in Acts 6:6-7. Another alternative possibility is that they did not repent from sinning, such as, continuing in worshipping idols; creating havoc in the society; and etc. As repentance has to be sought prior to the conversion to Christianity, they must have repented from sin prior to receiving the Holy Spirit. Thus, the absence of the word, repentance, in Acts 6:6-7 does not imply that they did not repent from sins prior to receiving the Holy Spirit.
The same is for the request of Jesus to come into their lives. Neither Acts 6:6-7 have mentioned that these people did receive the Holy Spirit nor these verses have mentioned clearly that they did or did not request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit. The absence of the words whether they did or did not request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit does not imply that they did not request Jesus to come into their lives. The insisting that they did not ask Jesus to come into their lives even though it is not mentioned at all, has indeed added words of assumption in which it is not even stated in Acts 6:6-7. What if these people did ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit and yet it is not stated in Acts 6:6-7, the discouraging among non-Christians to pray for the receipt of the Holy Spirit would simply cause them not to be born again.
The same is for other factors, such as, confession of sins; acknowledge Jesus to die on the cross, are not even spelt out in the event of Acts 6:6-7. The absence of these factors does not imply that they did not do it.
In conclusion for Acts 6:6-7, despite the phrase, sinner’s prayer, is not mentioned in the book of Acts and yet the elements of the sinner’s prayer can be found here and there in the Bible. Even in the book of Acts, certain part of the event does mention part of it. However, the absence of the elements that should exercise prior to the receipt of the Holy Spirit in Acts 6:6-7, does not imply that they did not exercise it.
2) Acts 8:34-38, “And the eunuch answered Philips, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? Of himself, or of some other men? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; What doeth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot the stand still: and they went down into water, both Philip and the eunuch: and be baptized him.”
Meditate the verses above and you would discover nothing is mentioned in the paragraph above that the eunuch had repented from sin prior to his baptism. As nothing is mentioned that he did repent from sin, this event should not be used to conclude that non-Christians could sin continually without repentant heart in order to be saved.
Nothing is mentioned that the eunuch did receive the Holy Spirit except the word, baptism, does not imply that it is not significant to receive the Holy Spirit. As nothing is mentioned in Acts 9:38 that he did receive the Holy Spirit except the phrase, be baptized, the eunuch most likely should have received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:38 in which the phrase, be baptized, is mentioned. Thus, despite he confessed Jesus is the Son of God in Acts 8:37, yet he only received the Holy Spirit after his baptism in Acts 8:37. It is obvious that there is a gap (between the time that he confessed Jesus to be the Son of God in Acts 8:37 and the time that he received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:38) in which the Holy Spirit is not with him. It gives us the implication that confession that Jesus is the Son of God might not be accompanied with immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit.
The above explanation proves that the absence of the elements of sinner’s prayer in the book of Acts, does not imply the people in the past did not exercise them. What if they did repent from sins; confessed sins before God for the forgiveness of sins; acknowledged Jesus has been resurrected; and praying for the receipt of the Holy Spirit and yet they are not mentioned clearly in the book of Acts, or what if these should be the plan of God for salvation, the intention to do away sinner’s prayer could cause many to fall and not to be born again.
3) Acts 10:44-48, “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed him to tarry certain days.”
The phrase, they of the circumcision which believed, in Acts 10:45 undoubtedly refers to the Jews since they were circumcised. The phrase, the Holy Ghost fell on them which heard the word, in Acts 10:44 refers to the Gentiles that received the Holy Spirit and yet the word, heard, is mentioned instead of the word, believed. Nothing is mentioned in Acts 10:44 that they believed in Jesus except that they heard the word. The absence of the word, believed, in Acts 10:44 does not imply that the Gentiles did not believe in Jesus prior to the receiving of the Holy Spirit.
Nothing is mentioned in Acts 10:44-48 that the Gentiles did repent from sin, does not imply that Gentiles could continue in sinning without repentant heart prior to the receipt of the Holy Spirit. The phrase, as the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost, is mentioned in Acts 10:45 prior to the phrase, And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord, it implies that the receipt of the Holy Spirit could be before the baptism was performed.
The following are the extracts from other events in the book of Acts in which the word, repentance, is not mentioned and yet those non-Christians should have repented from sin:
Acts 8:12-17, “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself beloved also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and…who, they received the Holy Spirit…Then laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.”
Acts 11:14-15, “Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.”
Acts 11:24, “For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.”
Acts 16:31-33, “And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spoke unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and his, straightway.” Again nothing is mentioned that these people did repent from sin and not even mentioning they did receive the Holy Spirit except the phrase, be baptized.
Some might argue that Acts 2:38 did mention the word, repent, to support that the Book of Acts encourages repentance. My query is why the word, repent, is not mentioned repeatedly in most of the events of the Book of Acts except Acts 2:38. As it is only mentioned in Acts 2:38 instead of in other events of the Book of Acts, it implies that the absence of the word, repent, in other parts of the Book of Acts, does not imply that non-Christians did not exercise it. The same is for the request of the receipt of the Holy Spirit. The absence of the phrase, to ask Jesus into our heart, in the book of Acts, does not imply that they did not exercise it.
From the above extracts and explanations, it could easily arrive at the conclusion that it is not justifiable to conclude that repentance is not necessary for the conversion of non-Christians just simply due to the absence of it in the book of Acts. The same is that it is irrational to oppose people to ask Jesus to come into their heart just because it is not stated in the Book of Acts. Similarly, no conclusion should be drawn out that confession of sins for non-Christians to God should be done away just simply with the excuse that it is not stated in the book of Acts.
Some commentators might suggest that believing leads to immediate forgiveness of sins and the receipt of the Holy Spirit. Discuss.
My personal conviction is that believing does not lead to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit and sins’ cleansing. Non-Christians that believe in Jesus have to be humble themselves before God to confess their sins before God to seek His forgiveness and the request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
For instance, if the doctrine, believing leads of immediate forgiveness of sins, is true, 1 John 1:9 would turn up to be in error for the following reasons:
a) Non-Christians needs not to confess their sins before God since God do not forgive their sins and their sins could not be forgiven unless they believe in Jesus instead of through confession of sins to God provided that the doctrine, believing leads to sins’ cleansing, is true.
b) Christians do not need to confess sins before God due to their believes have granted them the forgiveness of sins and there is no need for them to confess their sins to God provided that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate sins’ cleansing, is true.
The above shows that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate sins’ cleansing, has contradicted the fundamental truth in 1 John 1:9. As 1 John 1:9 contains any error, the doctrine, that believing leads to immediate sins’ cleansing, should be rejected and that there is a need to confess sins before God for sins’ cleansing. Thus, there is a need for non-Christians to confess their sins before God to seek His forgiveness and that is why sinner’s prayer must not be done away.
For instance, if the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2 would turn up to be in error for the following reasons:
a) If the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the disciples should not ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit before the Pentecost since the Holy Spirit would not descend upon them prior to the day that Jesus was glorified as mentioned in John 16:7. As the Holy Spirit would not descend upon the disciples prior to the Pentecost, the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2 should not be asked. This is by virtue of the Holy Spirit would descend automatically upon the disciples upon the day of Pentecost and that there is no need for them to ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit provided believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit.
b) If the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed, in Acts 19:2, should not be asked even after the day of Pentecost. This is by virtue of the Holy Spirit would descend automatically upon the disciples after their believing in Jesus provided that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true.
c) If the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed, in Acts 19:2 should not be asked among non-Christians. This is by virtue of non-Christians in this modern society need not to ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit since God come to them at the time of their belief provided that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true.
d) If the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed, in Acts 19:2, should not be asked among Christians. This is by virtue of Christians in this modern society should not ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit since their believing in Jesus has led to the immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit provided that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true.
As the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, has led to the contradiction of the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2, it implies that this doctrine should be rejected and that the doctrine, believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, should not be established.
Some commentators might oppose sinner’s prayer with the excuse that the Scripture does not demand people to ask Jesus into their heart. Discuss.
The most obvious verses to show that the Bible does contain verses pertaining to asking Jesus into our heart:
Acts 8:15, “they were come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit…” The phrase, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, in Acts 8:15 implies that the people did ask Jesus into their heart.
Luke 11:13, “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” The phrase, [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him, in Luke 11:13 implies Jesus even mentioned the asking of the Holy Spirit into our heart.
The less obvious verses that give the hint in the Bible pertaining to asking Jesus into our heart:
John 4:10, “ Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.” The phrase, living water, in John 4:15 should refer undoubtedly to eternal life. As the phrase, If thou knewest the gift of God…thou wouldest have asked of him, is mentioned in Acts 4:10 with the phrase, living water, it implies the asking of Jesus to receive the gift of God, that is the Holy Spirit, that leads to living water and that is eternal life. The word, asked, is mentioned in this verse.
John 6:32-34, “ Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.” The phrase, the true bread, in John 6:32 should refer to Jesus. As the phrase, Then said they unto him…give us this bread, is mentioned in Acts 6:34 with the phrase, true bread, in John 6:32, it implies that the disciples did ask for the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 19:2, “He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” The phrase, Have ye receive the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, in Acts 19:2 implies the possibility of the absence of the Holy Spirit among the people that believe in Jesus. Or else, there should not be any reason for Acts 19:2 to raise a query that, Have ye receive the Holy Ghost since ye believed? Instead, the verse should mention that the Holy Ghost is in you since ye believed. As the phrase, Have ye receive the Holy Ghost since ye believed?, is mentioned in Acts 19:2, non-Christians have to express to God for their desire to allow Jesus to come into their heart to be their Lord and Personal Saviour.
A non-Christian that prays with sinner’s prayer without repentant heart would not be saved since God hears no sinner as mentioned in Psalm 59:1-2. It is only when that non-Christian has repented from sinning, such as, discontinuing in worshipping idols, and etc., and then follow up with sinner’s prayer, God would then listen and answer their prayer and be saved. Thus, the answer, whether non-Christian that prays sinner’s prayer without repentant heart could have the assurance to be saved, is definitely no.
Dear Jay,
I want to thank you for all you did for me. I was a false convert for 33 years and I was convinced for 2 years that I was unpardonable because of my careless lifestyle and disregard for sin. It was 2 letters that you sent me 9 months ago that gave me hope and I still treasure them today. I have had my ups and downs, but now I believe what happened to me has happened to many others with all the bad teaching out there.
Thank you for your help my brother. I was nothing more than a stranger to you and God used you and your testimony to put me back on my feet. God Bless you Jay.
Brother Blaine,
All glory to God for He is the sovereign king who orchestrates all things for the good of those who love Him. I am so glad to hear your walk with God is refreshed and renewed by His strength and power.
Soli Deo Gloria!
My name is Blaine Seman. I was raised a Roman Catholic by my parents. At the age of 20, I thought that I had become a born again Christian and was introduced and lived “easy believism”. I did not fear God and without the fear of the Lord I did not have the strength or the desire to overcome sin.
In the spring of 2009, I fully realized that I had been deceived and had a false conversion. My heart softened by the plowing of the law of God and I got truly saved and was baptized. Although, I still struggled with the guilt of my past and my depression continued, the Lord was at work healing me. I just couldn’t believe how badly I was deceived and for how many years.
In the fall of 2010, I fully accepted and understood God’s mercy to me and as a result forgave myself. I realized that I am still living and the “whosoever will” (Rev 22:17) was still a wonderful truth in my life. I claim the promise that if one truly repents and turns to Christ, He will in no wise cast them out (John 6:37). I am also reassured that God cannot and will not lie.
Now, although still a sinner (ie a forgiven one), I have a new hatred for sin like never before. I hate what my sins did to my Lord on the cross and what it did in my life. I now understand and embrace the grace of God, all to Him I owe. My greatest desire is to be like Christ, serve Him well, and live to glorify Him. I used to believe that heaven was a free gift, but now I know that Jesus Christ is the free gift. Praise be to God forever. Amazing Grace.
Is it rational to support that the reason for Acts 19:2, “…(to mention that) Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?….” is merely the people that had received only John’s baptism and know nothing about Christ?
Detailed analyses of Acts 18-19 as below:
Acts 18:1, “…Paul…came to Corinth;” Acts 18:4, “And he reasoned in the synagogue…persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.” Acts 18:23, “And after he had spent some time [there], he departed, and went over [all] the country of Galatia and Phrygia…” From the above extracts, it is obvious that Acts 19:2 should not have any relationship prior to Acts 18:23 since Paul departed Corinth as mentioned in Acts 18:23. Thus, we have to meditate from Acts 18:24 in order to find out the reason why the query in Acts 19:2 is raised.
Acts 18:24-25, “And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, [and] mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John. “
Who was the man that commented that he knew Acts 18:25, “…only the baptism of John.”? It was none other than Acts 18:24, “…Apollos…” himself. Who was this man, Apollos, as mentioned in Acts 18:24? Refer to the Strong Concordance where the word, Apollos, is found in Acts 18:24 as follows: A learned Jew from Alexandra and mighty in Scripture who became a Christian and a teacher of Christianity>” This definition can be located in the website at http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G625&t=KJV.
As the phrase, This man was instructed in the way of the Lord…and taught diligently the things of the Lord, is mentioned in Acts 18:24-25 in addition to the reference of the name, Apollos, above, it is easily to come to the conclusion that Apollos was guided by God to the way of the Lord since the phrase, This man was instructed in the way of the Lord, is mentioned in Acts 18:25. This Apollos was not an ordinary Jew since he knew the truth of the Scripture as mentioned in Acts 18:25, “…This man was instructed in the way of the Lord…”
Apollos took the step in reaching out to the Jews in the synagogue about God’s truth since Acts 18:26, “(mentions that) And he (Apollos) began to speak boldly in the synagogue:…”
Not only that, Apollos could even guide Acts 18:26, “…Aquila and Priscilla…(in truth by) expounded unto him the way of God MORE PERFECTLY.” Refer to the Strong Concordance who was this Aquila as mentioned in Acts 18:26? Aquila was a Jew of Pontus, a tent maker to Christ, companion and ally of Paul in propagating Christianity. Certainly! He is a believer. This definition can be located at http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G207&t=KJV.
Who is Priscilia then? Priscilia was a Christian woman, the wife of Aquila and this definition can be located in the website at http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4252&t=KJV.
Did Apollos know that grace is to live by faith in Acts 18? Yes, he believed since Acts 18:27, “(mentions that) And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, WHEN HE WAS COME, HELPED THEM which HAD BELIEVED THROUGH GRACE:” As the phrase, when he…come, helped them…which had believed through grace, is mentioned in Acts 18:27 with the phrase, the disciples…receive him, it implies that Apollos knew that grace is by faith. The word, grace, in Acts 18:27 has been defined in the Strong Concordance to be Christianity faith as extracted below: of the merciful kindness by which God; exerting his holy influence upon souls; turns them to Christ; keeps, strengthens, increases them in Christian faith, knowledge, affection, and kindles them to the exercise of the Christian virtues The above definition of the word, grace, can be located in
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5485&t=KJV.
This man, Apollos, even believed that Jesus is Christ since he spoke to the Jews and to convince them that Jesus is Christ as mentioned in Acts 18:28, “(that) For he mightily convinced the Jews, [and that] publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.”
As Apollos had already been a believer in Christ as mentioned in Acts 18:25, why is it Acts 18:25, “(mentions that he)…knowing only the baptism of John.”? The only possible reason for Scripture to mention that he knew only John’s baptism is he was speaking concerning the knowledge of the baptism of John and the baptism by the Holy Spirit instead of including other knowledge that are pertaining to whether he knew Jesus is Christ as well as other knowledge. By comparing the two baptisms, Apollos replied that he knew only John’s baptism since he was ignorant about the baptism by the Holy Spirit and this led him to Acts 19:2, “(mention that)…We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” Or in other words, Apollos already believed Jesus is Christ (Acts 18:28) and had already known the way of God (Acts 18:25) and that grace is to live by faith (Acts 18:27). The only thing that he did not know is baptism by the Holy
Spirit as spelt out in Acts 19:2 and that caused Acts 18:25, “(to mention that he knew)…only the baptism of John.”
Even though Apollos believed that Jesus is Christ (Acts 18:28) and had already known the way of God (Acts 18:25) and believed that grace is to live by faith (Acts 18:27), yet he was asked whether he has received the Holy Spirit since Acts 19:2, “(mentions that)…Have ye receive the Holy Ghost since ye be believed?…” and lately he was led to be baptized by Paul and John as mentioned in Acts 19:4 to receive the Holy Spirit in Acts 19:6. For instance, if the concept of ‘believing attracts immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit’ is true, Apollos should not be asked whether there is Holy Spirit within his body (Acts 19:2) and there should not be any mentioning of the receipt of the Holy Spirit in Acts 19:6 since he had believed Jesus to be Christ (Acts 18:28) and that the Holy Spirit should have come automatically into his body.
As the phrase, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed, is mentioned in Acts 19:2, it implies the possible absence of the Holy Spirit when a person believes in Jesus and that is why we need to request for the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
Is it rational to use Ephesians 2:8-9 to support that salvation is through merely faith?
Let’s meditate Ephesians 2:8-9 below carefully:
Ephesians 2:8-9, “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.”
The original meaning of the word, works, in Ephesians 2:8-9 in Strong Concordance can be located in the website address as follows: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2041&t=KJV. The definition is listed out as follows:
1) Business, employment, that which any one is occupied;
a) that which one undertakes to do, enterprise, undertaking
2) ANY PRODUCT whatever, any thing accomplished by hand, art, industry, or MIND;
3) an act, deed, thing done; the idea of working is emphasized in opp. that that which is less than work
Refer to clause 2 above for the definition of the word, works, and you would discover that the definition of the word, works, in Ephesians 2:9-10 not only include the work of action, but also the work of mind since the word, mind, is mentioned at the end of clause 2. As the word, works, in Ephesians 2:9-10 could include also the byproduct that comes out from mind, it should include faith in Jesus and even confessing Jesus as Lord. Thus, the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:9 implies that we are saved not because any of our works whether it is directed from our mind through faith in Jesus or our confession in Jesus or any work that is directed towards Jesus. This interpretation is confirmed by the phrase, that not of yourselves, that is mentioned in Ephesians 2:9. For instance, if we comment that we are saved merely through our faith in God or our confession in God, it certainly means that our salvation is directed from the work of our mind
that work towards to have faith in Jesus. As the phrase, not of yourselves…Not of works, is mentioned in Ephesians 2:8-9, it implies that we could not give credit of our salvation to our mind and that is to our faith in Jesus or even any of our work of action to God. Instead, our salvation is directed solely from the grace of God or the gift of God through faith. Our salvation is merely through the grace of God through faith in which we have been quickened together with Christ so as to raise us up from death as mentioned in Ephesians 2:5-6, “(that) Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised [us] up together, and made [us] sit together in heavenly [places] in Christ Jesus:” Or in other words, we are saved by grace not because of our faith in Jesus or our any good work in Jesus. If God do not quicken us together with Christ, we could never be saved even if there is
the work of faith in us or any good work to Him.
Many commentators might suggest that the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:5-6 to be interpreted as we do not need to do any work to God in order to be saved. It is erroneous to support it since the word, works, (please refer to Strong Concordance) in its original meaning not only includes the work of actions, but also the work of mind. As the word, works, in its original meaning should cover the work of mind, the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:5-6 should imply that our salvation should not be from the work of faith in Jesus. Or in other words, the insisting of the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:5-6 to be interpreted as we do not need any work to achieve salvation, would turn up to be we do not need to have any work of faith in us towards Jesus in order to be saved.
As our salvation is not the work of our work of faith in Jesus, why should Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace are ye saved through faith;…”? Meditate Ephesians 2:8-9 carefully and you will discover the phrase, by grace are ye saved through faith. The word, grace, in Ephesians 2:8-9 is mentioned. Or in other words, it is the grace that God that quicken us to cause us to be saved through faith and it is not by our work of faith or any good work to Jesus alone but also has to include his abounding grace in us. Thus, it is erroneous to interpret the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:8-9 as we do not need any works to be saved or else we need not to have faith in Jesus since the word, works, should also include the work of our faith in Jesus.
From the above elaboration, it could come to the conclusion that the phrase, Not of works, in Ephesians 2:8-9 should be interpreted as we must not give credits of our salvation to any of our work and even of our mind, i.e. how much faith we have in Christ, since it is purely the gift of God that enables us to be saved through faith.
Does Ephesians 2:8-9 support that the Holy Spirit is solely the one that enables us to believe in Jesus and to enable us to confess in sins and to also enable us to be converted to Christianity without our effort and respond towards God?
Let’s meditate the phrase, For by grace are ye saved through faith, in Ephesians 2:8.
The root word (Etymology), through, in its original meaning from Ephesians 2:8 as spelt out in the Strong Concordance as a primary preposition denoting a channel of act and this can be located at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1223&t=KJV. As the root word of the word, through, in Ephesians 2:8 contains the meaning of a channel of act, it implies the requisition of our action in order to achieve salvation.
The word, faith, in Ephesians 2:8 is defined by Strong Concordance as follows:
1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of A CONVICTION OR BELIEF RESPECTING MAN’S RELATIONSHIP TO GOD and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it
a) relating to God : the conviction that God exists and is the creator and ruler of all things, the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ
b) relating to Christ : a strong and welcome conviction or belief that Jesus is the Messiah, through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God
c) the religious beliefs of Christians
d) belief with the predominate idea of trust (or confidence) whether in God or in Christ, springing from faith in the same
2) fidelity, faithfulness
a) the character of one who can be relied on
The above definition can be located in the website address as follows: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4102&t=KJV.
This phrase, a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God, in clause 1 above has the implication that we have to establish our relationship vertically upward to God with our conviction or belief. Clause 1 a) stresses that our conviction has to be that God is the creator and ruler of all things and he is the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ. Clause 1b) stresses also that our conviction has to be that Jesus is the Messiah through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God. From the extracted definition of the word, faith, from Strong Concordance above pertaining to its original meaning, it could easily derive at the conclusion that salvation has to be accompanied with our response to God since clauses 1(a) and 1(b) are pertaining to our direct relationship towards our conviction to God. Nevertheless, it is rational to conclude that Ephesians 2:8 stresses that salvation has to be through our
faith in Jesus to be the Messiah and that we could obtain salvation through him.
As the phrase, through faith, in Ephesians 2:8 has been defined in the Strong Concordance in its original meaning as explained above to be related to our faith or conviction that Jesus is the Messiah and that our salvation is through him, it certainly refers to the work of our mind in order to achieve faith in God. Does the phrase, through faith, in Ephesians 2:8 contradict with the phrase, Not of works, as mentioned in Ephesians 2:9 since faith refers to salvation has to be the work of mind through faith and yet the phrase, Not of works, refers to not even cover the work of mind? Let’s meditate the phrase, For by grace are ye saved through faith, in Ephesians 2:8 again. Bear in mind both the word, grace, and the phrase, through faith, are mentioned in Ephesians 2:8 indicating that grace has to work hand in hand with the phrase, through faith, in order for salvation to be achieved. Or in other words, salvation is not solely the work of the
mind, i.e. faith in Jesus as mentioned in Ephesians 2:8, but it is the combination of both the grace (that is God’s gift that has been granted vertically downward from Jesus to us) and the faith (that is our response to God vertically upward from us to Jesus by means of our belief that Jesus is Messiah and is the only one that could save us). As the word, grace, does not isolate itself in Ephesians 2:8 since the phrase, through faith, is mentioned to be the accompany, it implies that salvation could not work if God grant us grace and yet we do not respond to God by means of our faith in Jesus. Or in other words, salvation could only be at work only when God’s grace has been granted to us with our response to God in faith. Thus, it is erroneous to support that the Holy Spirit come to speak to us and we would definitely become Christianity since we have to respond to the Holy Spirit in order to be saved. If the Holy Spirit speaks to us and yet we
do not respond to it, it would serve no purpose on salvation. Meditate carefully the phrase, For BY GRACE are ye saved THROUGH FAITH, in Ephesians 2:8 and you would discover that grace and faith have to work hand in hand in order to be saved instead of mentioning grace alone or faith alone. If you have faith and do not receive God’s grace, it serves no purpose for salvation. Even if God’s grace intends to be for you and you do not respond it with your faith, it serves no purpose for salvation either.
Is it rational to use the phrase, For by grace are ye saved through faith, in Ephesians 2:8-9 to support that we do not need to repent from sin or need not to confess sin before God or do not need to acknowledge the death of Jesus and His resurrection or do not need to confess Jesus as Lord in order to be saved just because the word, faith, in Ephesians 2:8 has its meaning to be restricted to our conviction to Jesus to be the Messiah and He is solely the provider of our salvation as mentioned formerly instead of this has to include other factors? No, it is irrational to support it since the phrase, through faith, is mentioned in Ephesians 2:8 instead of the phrase, only through faith. Unless the phrase, through faith, in Ephesians 2:8 has been replaced by the phrase, only through faith, it is then rational to support that salvation is merely through faith and nothing else. As the word, only, or, alone, is not mentioned with the word, faith, in
Ephesians 2:8 to restrict the scope of additional application, it is rational for one to conclude that salvation is the gift of God through faith but not limited to faith but also include repentance from sin; confessing of sins; acknowledging the death and the resurrection of Jesus; and even requesting Jesus into our lives to be our Personal Saviour.
Some might comment that repentance is only the fruit after converting to Christianity. Discuss.
Let’s meditate Acts 2:38-39 in replying to the above query:
Acts 2:38-39, “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”
The word, Repent, in Acts 2:38 has been defined in the Strong Concordance with the following definition and it could be located in the website address as follows: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3340&t=KJV
1) to change one’s mind, i.e. to repent
2) to change one’s mind for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one’s past sins
Refer to clause 2) above of the definition of the word, Repent, and you would discover that this word implies the amendment with abhorrence of one’s past sins. Or in other words, a person has to abandon in sinning. As the word, Repent, is mentioned in Acts 2:38-39 prior to both the word, be baptized, and the phrase, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, it implies that non-Christians have to abandon in sinning prior to the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
The word, remission, as mentioned in Acts 2:38 has been defined in the Strong Concordance with the following definition and it could be located in the website address as follows: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G859&t=KJV.
1) release from bondage or imprisonment .
2) forgiveness or pardon, of sins (letting them go as if they had never been committed), remission of the penalty.
The phrase, forgiveness or pardon of sin, is mentioned in clause 2 in the definition of the word, remission, implies forgiveness of sin. As the phrase, remission of sins, is mentioned in Acts 2:38-39 prior to the phrase, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, it implies that forgiveness of sins has to be done prior to the receipt of the Holy Spirit and that is why we include confession of sin as seeking God for his forgiveness prior to our request of the receipt of the Holy Spirit in sinner’s prayer.
What is the definition of the word, sins, in Acts 2:38-39? The definition of sins is spelt out as follows and can be located at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G266&t=KJV
1) equivalent to 264
a) to be without a share in
b) to miss the mark
c) to err, be mistaken
d) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong
e) to wander from the law of God, violate God’s law, sin
2) that which is done wrong, sin, an offence, a violation of the divine law in thought or in act
3) collectively, the complex or aggregate of sins committed either by a single person or by many
Refer to clause 1e) above, it refers to the violation of God’s law or God’s commandments. As Clause 2) states that a violation of the divine law in thought or in act, it implies that a person is still considered to be in sin even if he has the mind of it without doing it.
Thus, Acts 2:38-39 demand us to abandon in sinning or seek God’s for forgiveness prior to converting to Christianity.
Mark 1:15 is another proof that repentance of sin has to be achieved prior to believing in the Gospel. The following is the extract:
Mark 1:15, “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”
Refer to the Strong Concordance and you would discover the original meaning for the word, repent, in Mark 1:15 coincides the word, repent, in Acts 2:38 that has the meaning of amending the past sins. As the word, repent, in Mark 1:15 is mentioned prior to the phrase, believe the gospel, it implies that non-Christians have to repent from sinning prior to receiving the Holy Spirit.
Another instance to prove that it is a must for repentance prior to conversion to Christianity:
Luke 13:1-3, “There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”
The above event was meant for certain people that told Jesus that Galilaeans were very sin. In response to their words, He mentioned with the phrase, except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish, in Luke 13:3. As the phrase, ye shall all likewise perish, is mentioned in Luke 13:3, it implies that these people were not the disciples of Jesus and could never be granted with salvation unless they repent.
What is the definition of the word, repent, as mentioned in Luke 13:3? If you refer to Strong Concordance, you would have discovered the definition of the word, repent, coincides with the word, Repent, in Acts 2:38 that gives the implication for a must in discontinuing in sins.
What is the definition of the word, perish, in Luke 13:3 then? The word, perish, has its definition as spelt out as below and can be located at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G622&t=KJV
1) to destroy
a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
b) render useless
c) to kill
d) to declare that one must be put to death
e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2) to destroy
a) to lose
Refer to clause 1a) above, the word, perish, has been defined as to destroy; to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin. Or in other words, these people would not be saved.
As the phrase, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish, is mentioned in Luke 13:3, it implies that these people that approached Jesus to condemn Galilaeans to be sinners could not be saved unless they have repented from sinning. As these words were meant for those people that had not been saved, it implies that non-Christians have to repent from sinning in order to be saved.
The same is mentioned in Luke 13:5, “(that) I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
Acts 3:19, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;”
Refer to the Strong Concordance, the word, Repent, in Acts 3:19 in its original word has the identical meaning as the word, Repent, in Acts 2:38 to imply the abandoning of sins.
The word, converted, is defined in the Strong Concordance below and it could be located in the website at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1994&t=KJV
1) transitively
a) to turn to
1) to the worship of the true God
b) to cause to return, to bring back
1) to the love and obedience of God
2) to the love for the children
3) to love wisdom and righteousness
2) intransitively
a) to turn to one’s self
b) to turn one’s self about, turn back
c) to return, turn back, come back
From the above definition, the word, converted, should simply mean turn back to God.
As the word, Repent, in Acts 3:19 is mentioned prior to the word, converted, it demands non-Christians to repent from their sins in order to be converted to Christianity.
The same is supported by the following verses:
Acts 8:22, “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.”
Acts 20:21, “Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.”
From the above analyses, it could come to the conclusion that repentance of sin is a must prior to converting to Christianity.
Repentance of sins is an on-going process in Christianity even though Christians would not lose salvation once they have fallen into sins or else Hebrews 6:6 would not mention that Christians could fall into sins and be renewed again unto repentance. Despite Christians might fall into sins, they will not lose their salvation. The following are the extracts for the reference:
Hebrews 6:4-6, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”
1 Corinthians 3:15, “If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”
The following are the extracts that Paul even struggled with sin and yet he is saved:
Romans 7:18-19, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.”
Why should we include confession of sins in sinner’s prayer?
Acts 2:38, “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
The definition of the word, baptized, in Strong Concordance is spelt out as below and it could be located at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G907&t=KJV:
1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe
3) to overwhelm
The above definition in the same page of Strong Concordance is also enclosed with a note of the explanation pertaining to John’s baptism and it does equate it as a baptism of repentance to Christian baptism. The following is the extract from the Strong Concordance:
Note on Baptism in Ac.Baptism in water (such as John’s) is distinguished from baptism with the Holy Spirit (i. 5, etc.). Those who receive the latter, however, may also be baptized in water (cf. xi. 16 with x. 47); and there is one example of people who had previously received John’s baptism receiving Christian baptism as a preliminary to receiving the Spirit (xix. 3 ff.). JOHN’S WAS A BAPTISM OF REPENTANCE (xiii. 24; xix. 4), AS WAS ALSO CHRISTIAN BAPTISM (ii. 38), but as John’s pointed forward to Jesus (xix. 4), it became obsolete when He came. Christian baptism followed faith in the Lord Jesus (xvi. 31 ff.); it was associated with His name (ii. 38; viii. 16, etc.), which was invoked by the person baptized (xxii. 16); it signified the remission (ii. 38) or washing away of sins (xxii. 16); sometimes it preceded (ii. 38; viii. 15 ff.; xix. 5), sometimes followed (x. 47 f.) the receiving of the Spirit.” (F. F. Bruce. The Acts of the Apostles [Greek Text
Commentary], London: Tyndale, 1952, p. 98, n. 1.)
Now let’s examine Matthew 3:6 as follows in comparison of Acts 2:38 above:
Matthew 3:6, “And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.”
If you refer to Strong Concordance to find out the definition of the word, baptized, in Matthew 3:6 and the enclosed note to baptism, you would have discovered that it has the identical meaning to Acts 2:8 and both refer to baptism of repentance as well as Christian baptism.
As Matthew 3:6 is meant for Christian baptism and the word, baptized, is mentioned in Matthew 3:6 with the phrase, confessing their sins, it implies that confession of sins to God is needed whenever it is associated with the word, baptized.
As the word, baptized, in Acts 2:38 has been defined by Strong Concordance to have the identical meaning of the word, baptized, in Matthew 3:6 and that Matthew 3:6 demands to confess sins at the time to be baptized, it implies that non-Christians have to confess sins before God prior to requesting for the receipt of the Holy Spirit since the phrase, be baptized, is mentioned in Acts 2:38 with the phrase, ye shall receive the Holy Ghost.
The same instance can be located in Mark 1:5 that has the word, baptized, to be found in the Strong Concordance that has the identical meaning as Acts 2:38 as extracted below:
Mark 1:5, “And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.”
Bearing in mind the phrase, confessing their sins, is mentioned in Mark 1:5 with the word, baptized, signifies it is a must for the confession of our sins to God prior to the requesting of the Holy Spirit.
As the word, baptized, is mentioned in Acts 2:38-39 (that is related to the claim of the Holy Spirit) coincides with the meaning of Matthew 3:6 as well as Mark 1:5 and yet Matthew 3:6 and Mark 1:5 demand for the confession of sins, that is why we include confession of sins to God in our sinner’s prayer.
Is it rational to use Acts 2:38-39 to support that we could receive the Holy Spirit only at the time of water baptism?
Acts 10:47, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” As Acts 10:47 is the evidence occurs at the time when the Gentiles had not been baptized with water baptism and yet the Holy Spirit had come unto them, it implies that non-Christians could receive the Holy Spirit prior to the performance of water baptism.
As Acts 10:47 supports that non-Christians could receive the Holy Spirit prior to water baptism, non-Christians could receive the Holy Spirit after repenting from sins and praying the Sinner’s prayer prior to water baptism to be performed.
Is it rational to support that our confession of sins must be in details?
The following are the extracts from the Scripture that confession of sins might not necessarily be in details to express our past wrong doings:
Exodus 34:8-9, “And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshipped. And he said, If now I have found grace in thy sight, O Lord, let my Lord, I pray thee, go among us; for it is a stiffnecked people; and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thine inheritance.”
Psalms 25:7, “Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions: according to thy mercy remember thou me for thy goodness’ sake, O LORD.”
Psalms 25:11, “For thy name’s sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.”
Psalms 41:4, “I said, LORD, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee.”
Psalms 51:1-3, “Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.”
Psalms 79:8-9, “O remember not against us former iniquities: let thy tender mercies speedily prevent us: for we are brought very low. Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name: and deliver us, and purge away our sins, for thy name’s sake.”
Psalms 106:6, “We have sinned with our fathers, we have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly.”
Matthew 6:12, “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
Luke 11:4, “And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us.”
Some commentators might argue that Peter had not seen the Holy Spirit fell upon the gentiles as He had on the Jews and that Jewish Christians never would have accepted the gentile Christians and these led them to pray for the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts 8:15. Discuss.
Let’s meditate Acts 8:5-17 carefully prior to tackling the query above:
Acts 8:5-6, “…PHILIP WENT DOWN TO THE CITY OF SAMARIA, AND PREACHED CHRIST UNTO THEM…” Acts 8:8-10, “…But there was a certain man, called Simon,… bewitched the people of Samaria,…saying, This man is the great power of God.”
Did the Samaria believe in Jesus after Acts 8:5, “…Philip (had)…preached Christ unto them…”? Yes, they did believe since Acts 8:12, “(mentions that)…THEY BELIEVED…concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of JESUS CHRIST…”
After Acts 8:12, “(Samaria had)…believed…(in) Jesus Christ”, did they follow up with water baptism? Yes, they did since in the latter part of Acts 8:12, “(it is mentioned that)…THEY WERE BAPTIZED, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN.”
Not only Samaria had been baptized, Acts 8:13, “…Simon himself believed also: and…(had been) baptized…”
What did the apostles do after knowing Samaria had Acts 8:12, “…believed (in)…Jesus Christ…(and) were baptized (with water baptism)…”? Acts 8:14-17, “…when the apostles which were at Jerusalem HEARD that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when THEY were come down, PRAYED FOR THEM, THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST.”
Did Samaria receive the Holy Spirit immediately after Acts 8:12, “…they (had) believed (in)…Jesus Christ…”? No, they did not receive the Holy Spirit at the time of their belief since Acts 8:14-17, “(mention that)…the apostles…heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they…c(a)me down, PRAYED FOR THEM, THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST.” Obviously there is a gap (between Acts 8:12 in which they had believed in Jesus and yet Acts 8:17 that they received the Holy Ghost) in which the Holy Spirit was not inside their bodies at the time of their belief. As Acts 8:14-17, “…the apostles… (came) down, (and) prayed for (Samaria) that they might receive the Holy Ghost” after Acts 8:12, “… they (had) believed… (in) Jesus Christ…”, it implies that believing does not lead to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit.
Did Samaria receive the Holy Spirit immediately after Acts 8:12, “…they…were baptized (with water baptism)…”? No, they did not receive the Holy Spirit immediately since Acts 8:14-17, “(mention that)…THEY…come down, PRAYED FOR THEM, THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST: (For as yet he WAS FALLEN UPON NONE OF THEM: ONLY THEY WERE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS.) …”
For instance, if the doctrine, that believing leads to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the people of Samaria should have received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:12. For instance, if the doctrine, that water baptism could direct immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit, is true, the people of Samaria should have received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:12. As the people of Samaria did not receive the Holy Spirit until Acts 8:17, “…Peter and John…prayed for them…”, it implies the possible absence of the Holy Spirit at the time of belief.
Now, let’s tackle the question above that some commentators support that Samaria should be treated as gentile Christians and these led them to pray for the Holy Spirit:
Who were these Samaria? The following are the extracts from Strong Concordance and it could be located at: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4540&t=KJV
Samaria = “guardianship”
1)A TERRITORY IN PALESTINE, which had Samaria as its capital
The phrase, a territory in Palestine, is mentioned in this definition and yet in the ancient map of Israel, Palestine was located at the border of Israel and yet Samaria was classified as part of Israel.
As Samaria was part of Israel (1 Kings 16:29, 21:18, 22:51, 2 Kings 3:1, 3:6, 10:36, 13:1, 13:10 and 15:8) instead of to be considered as gentiles, it is erroneous to interpret Acts 8:5-17 to be the event that Peter had not seen the Holy Spirit fell upon the gentiles and that Jewish Christians did not accept them and these caused them to pray for the receipt of the Holy Spirit.
Nevertheless, the event in Acts 8:5-17 does provide the proof that believing does not lead to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit and that is why sinner’s prayer should be stressed.
Instance that Saul could proclaim that Jesus to be the Lord prior to receiving the Holy Spirit.
Let’s meditate Acts 9:1-18 with detailed analyses as follows:
Acts 9:1, “And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,” Acts 9:4, “And HE FELL TO THE EARTH, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”
After falling down, did Saul question the Lord who was He? Yes he did question the Lord since Acts 9:5, “(mentions that)…he said, WHO ARE THOU, LORD? …”
What was the reply to Saul after questioning who was He? The Lord admitted that He was Jesus since Acts 9:5, “(mentions that)…the Lord said, I AM JESUS whom thou persecutest…”
Did Saul call Jesus to be the Lord after realizing that the One that he spoke to was none other than Jesus Himself as mentioned in Acts 9:5? Acts 9:6, “And he trembling and astonished said, LORD, WHAT WILT THOU HAVE ME TO DO? …”
If you would refer to the definition of the word, Lord, in Acts 9:6 from Strong Concordance, you would have discovered that its original meaning is identical to the word, Lord, in Romans 10:9 that is defined as allowing Jesus to take control of Saul’s life to be his Master. Or in other words, when Saul mentioned the word, Lord, in Acts 9:6, it implies his desire to have Jesus to take control of him to be his Master.
Could Saul have sight problem after opening his eyes? Acts 9:8, “And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.”
Did Saul receive the Holy Spirit when he called Jesus to be the Lord in Acts 9:6 after realizing that Jesus is Lord in Acts 9:5? No, he did not receive the Holy Spirit when he called Jesus to be the Lord in Acts 9:5 since Acts 9:17, “(mentions that)…Ananias…said, BROTHER SAUL, …that THOU MIGHTEST RECEIVE THY SIGHT, AND BE FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST” and Acts 9:18, “…immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.” Thus, despite Saul proclaim Jesus to be the Lord in Acts 9:6 after realizing that the One that he spoke to was none other than Jesus in Acts 9:5, yet he only received the Holy Spirit in Acts 9:18 since the phrase, there fell from his eyes as it had been scales…and was baptized, is mentioned then.
Nevertheless, there is an obvious gap (between Acts 9:6 in which he called Jesus to be the Lord and Acts 9:18 that the Holy Spirit came upon him) in which he believed in Jesus and yet the Holy Spirit was not with him, it implies that a person that calls Jesus to be his Lord might not necessarily have received the Holy Spirit.
What was the reason that the Holy Spirit was not with Saul even though he did proclaim Jesus to be his Lord in Acts 9:6 and that led him to be baptized with the Holy Spirit in Acts 9:18?
Let’s meditate James 2:17-19 for clarification:
James 2:17-19, “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.”
As the phrase, faith…hath not works is dead, is mentioned in James 2:17, it implies that our confession to Jesus to be our Lord has to be accompanied with action or else our faith is in vain. As the word, Lord, in Romans 10:9, 10:13 and 1 Corinth 12:3 has been defined in the Strong Concordance as allowing Jesus to come and control the lives of non-Christians to be their Master, they have to follow with action to request the Holy Spirit to come into their lives and that is why there is a need for the request of the receipt of the Holy Spirit. We are told from the Scripture not to be the hearers of God’s words but be the doers.
James 2:19 mentions that even the devils believe and yet tremble. The reason is simply that the devils believe and yet they do not follow with action to receive Him as their Master.
The same is mentioned in Matthew 7:21, “(that) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven; but HE THAT DOETH the will of my father which is in heaven.” Non-Christians are urged to be the doers of the Scripture instead of hearers. When the Scripture demands non-Christians to call Jesus as the Lord, it demands them to allow Jesus to come into their lives to take control of them.
Despite Saul proclaimed Jesus to be his Lord in Acts 9:6, his action to receive Jesus Christ was in Acts 9:17-18 and that caused him to be converted then.
The less obvious event that proves that believing does not lead to immediate receipt of the Holy Spirit is taken from Acts 8:27-39 about the conversion of the eunuch. The following is the analysis:
Acts 8:27-28, “…a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch…had come tg Jerusalem for to worship, was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet”
What did Philip do when he met the eunuch? Acts 8:35, “…Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.”
When did Philip believe in Jesus as mentioned in Acts 8? Let’s Meditate Acts 8:36-37 below prior to tackling this question:
Acts 8:36, “… THE EUNUCH SAID, See, here is water; WHAT DOTH HINDER ME TO BE BAPTIZED?” Acts 8:37, “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I BELIEVE THAT JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD.”
Some might support that the eunuch believed in Jesus in Acts 8:37 since Acts 8:37, “(mentions that he).. answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” However, some might argue that it should be in Acts 8:36, “(since)…the eunuch said, …what doth hinder me to be baptized?” Their support to be in Acts 8:36 would be due to there should not be any justifiable reason for him to ask to be baptized if he did not believe in Jesus. In any of the above analyses, the eunuch should have started to believe in Jesus either in Acts 8:36 or in 8:37.
Did Acts 8 mention that he did receive the Holy Spirit after believing? No, it did not mention that, except the phrase, be baptized him, is mentioned in Acts 8:38. The following is the extract:
Acts 8:38, “And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.”
As nothing is mentioned whether the eunuch did receive the Holy Spirit except the phrase, he baptized him, in Acts 8:38, it might come to the conclusion that he only received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:38.
For instance, if he only received the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:38, there is a gap of time in which the Holy Spirit should not be with him in the early part of Acts 8:38, “(that mentions that)…he commanded the chariot to stand still…” and he had not received the Holy Spirit until after the latter part of Acts 8:38 despite he had believed in Jesus in either Acts 8:36 or 8:37.
Some commentators might use Luke 23:43 to support that one of the thieves did not request Jesus to accept him in paradise to support that this verse does not demand non-Christian to ask for the Holy Spirit. Discuss.
Prior to tackling this question, let’s meditate Matthew 27:44:
Matthew 27:44, “The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.”
As the phrase, cast the same in his teeth, is mentioned in Matthew 27:44, it implies that both the thieves did sin against the Lord.
Did one of the thieves repent from sin? Let’s meditate Luke 23:42-43 carefully below:
Luke 23:42-43, “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”
Nothing is mentioned in Luke 23:42-43 that the thief did repent from sin and it should be there or else it would not be possible for him to inform Luke 23:42, “…Jesus (that), Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom…”
If you would refer the word, Lord, in Luke 23:42, you would have discovered that the definition of the word, Lord, in Luke 23:42 coincides the word, Lord, in Romans 10:9 that the thief directly approached Jesus and demanded Him to take control of his life to be his Master. As the phrase, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom, is mentioned in Luke 23:42, it implies that the thief did request Jesus to accept or in other words, to receive him in paradise. Or in other words, this thief did sincerely ask Jesus to come and take control of his life to be his Master and that caused Him to mention that he Luke 23:43, “…shalt be with (Him) in paradise.”