Hi Berean Girl,
This is long, but it may help get you started. It is an excerpt from a thread I started called, "The Betrayal of the Ages."
THE ORIGINS OF THE MODERN DAY ALTAR CALL
In the 1820's, Charles Finney, considered by many to be the "father of modern evangelism", used his so-called "new measures" that disturbed many pastors and created much opposition to the revivals. Many of these 'new measures' in one form or another are so 'a part' of modern evangelical Christendom that it will seem odd to the reader that these measures are in many cases less than 200 years old. Until Finney popularized the 'new methods', conversions were considered a personal affair. Whitefield may have witnessed excited emotional outbursts of folk crying out in repentance during the meeting, but he would never have asked inquirers to sit on an "anxious bench", or pray publicly any type of repeated prayer as a sign of repentance. Before Finney, people were presented with the truth, but were never asked to respond to the message in any way. To elicit a response would be seen as calculated to assure a planned result, usurping the work of the Holy Spirit.
Consider that the famous Jonathan Edward's sermon, "Sinners in the hand of an angry God" was not preached, but 'read', with little, or no voice inflection. The reason the hearers response to that message was considered a movement of God was precisely because the reaction it inspired was spontaneous. It was not a 'hyped' up message. Appeals to the emotions were not generally considered a legitimate means of getting a sinner to turn to Christ. After the sermon, no altar call was given.
To the ministers in that time an altar call would have been considered manipulative. They believed that if God were not willing to stir the people's hearts, why would a minister attempt to elicit an emotional response? Therefore it is safe to say that the appeal was not to the emotions, but the conscience and hence the WILL. Emotions fade, but a genuine conversion to Christ will yield a born again Christian. Emotional ‘decisions’ lead to spurious conversions. Consider that Jonathan Edward's toiled six months in the First Great Awakening and was ecstatic to see 300 souls saved. Compare that to modern evangelistic events where according to the promoters, "10,000 responding to the invitation to Christ" or in Africa were folks are responding in HUGE evangelistic campaigns by the hundreds of thousands and ‘saved’ by the millions.
Dr. D. James Kennedy recently reported that his stats show that only 45% of Americans are really Christians (Ironically he Wrote 'Evangelism Explosion' the witnessing program). The reason we arrive at those claims is that the criteria for determining who is or is not a Christian is very obscure and quite unbiblical in most cases. Once the emphasis was placed on 'quantity' and not 'quality' of conversions- it became a numbers game. It has been said that in order to 'manage' one must be able to 'measure'. And the Evangelical Church has been numbering the people for over 100 years.
"NEW MEASURES" IN THE WRONG HANDS
Patrick McIntyre in his work [i]“The Scandal of Modern Evangelism”[/i] writes, “Finney believed most Ministers disliked the "new methods" because they were unwilling to call their congregations to repentance. He thought they used the "sovereignty of God" as an excuse for putting up with nominal Christianity." A cursory look at Finney's "Lectures on Revival" demonstrate this. Yet, it must be remembered that Finney was a very dedicated man of God who's personal standard of holiness was so high he considering the drinking of tea to be an extravagance. His sober countenance, (and perhaps the presence of the Holy Spirit), caused many to break down emotionally. He took the words of Jesus literally, and eschewed the lures of the world without compromise. Perhaps the "new measures" were appropriate to his complete devotion and trust in the power of God.
Finney believed folk should come out and demonstrate their repentance and faith. Like Elijah demanding "Who is on my side?" , or Joshua, "Choose this day who you will serve," his methods were a natural extension of his zeal. Finney did not compromise the born again standard. In fact, Finney was far more exacting than most conservative Evangelicals today ever hoped to be. His "False Comfort For Sinners" is perhaps the best guide ever written for ministers in dealing with the lost. But because the "new methods" appealed to the emotions, any persuasive charlatan (even a wolf in sheep's clothing) could use them with seemingly impressive results. Finney used whatever was at hand to bring a person to repentance and faith. He believed that a person could and MUST repent NOW.
[u]Everyone is not Charles G. Finney though.[/u] Where Finney might spend two weeks teaching on salvation before someone even got up and sat on the anxious seat; a lesser minister might try to convince sinners to come forward or to an after meeting after one sermon. Hence we witnessed the beginnings of new ‘measures’ being used in the beginning as a ‘good thing’, but would later be taken by folk and used with a halfhearted Gospel and the results are unimaginably horrifying. What a dangerous thing these new measures became in the hands of careless ministers.
FROM “HOPEFULLY CONVERTED” TO “SAVED” IN 39 YEARS
THE FIRST MODERN DAY ALTAR CALL
Some accounts tell us that as early as 1740's, Eleazer Wheelock, a Congregational Minister, had to stop preaching because he was drowned out by the "distress and outcry" of the congregation. "Not being able to finish his sermon, with great apparent serenity and calmness of soul, he called to the distressed, and desired that they gather themselves together in the body of the seats below" (The front seats). This is perhaps the beginnings of the modern "altar call". Wheelock is said to have only shared the Gospel and prayed for the penitents. He never presumed to have them repeat a formula "sinner's prayer." Over the next 200+ years the practice of public invitation would evolve into the modern day 'altar call' as has been witnessed hundreds of times in modern mass evangelism crusades. Some, in the early days, used the simple mourner's bench. Anxious meeting were held after the meeting or the next day for those who felt 'anxious' about their soul. Some preferred the "inquiry room", where they have the exercises of prayer for the lost, and the like. Praying for penitents, in itself, was not considered a "new method." It was common with Whitefield and Wesley. Any who sought prayer, were welcome to see them after the meeting. They prayed that penitents would yield themselves fully to God, but never led them in a formula "salvation prayer." By the 1800's, the practice of calling penitents forward for prayer was well established." Ministers usually, at the close of the preaching, would tell the congregation that if there were any persons who felt themselves lost and condemned under the guilt and burden of their sins, that if they would come near the stage, and kneel down, they would pray for them. Shame at first kept many back, but as the work increased, numbers, apparently under strong conviction, would come and fall down before the Lord at the feet of the ministers. Sometimes 20 or 30 at a time."
WHAT WAS DONE WAS DONE
McIntyre continues along this line, “Finney could not undo what he had done. The die was caste. All the clichés and quackery epitomized by Sinclair Lewis' Elmer Gantry began here. Charles Finney's methods, in the hands of incompetents and charlatans would ultimately produce millions of spurious conversions. The "methods" became the easiest way for ungifted and lazy men to produce "results."" It was like giving a gun to a six-year-old child. Evangelists like D.L. Moody used some "methods" to good effect. Others, less gifted, abused the "methods" and brought reproach on all evangelists. The "methods" were not widespread until Billy Sunday, the model for Lewis' Elmer Gantry. Though well meaning, Sunday popularized the tally system, emphasizing the number of people who "walked the sawdust trail" instead of how many people "the Lord added to the Church." Sunday popularized the practice of "coming forward" as a symbol for the sinner who wanted to "get right with God." Despite this, Sunday in the beginning still relied on the after meeting where counselors would deal with awakened sinners one-on-one. He never led people in a formula "salvation prayer.”
PREACHERS BECOMING CELEBRITIES
Perhaps we could lay much of the problem at the feet of the use of the modern day 'press'. When 'meetings' were advertised and covered in the newspapers suddenly there was an added pressure to have 'results'. After all, who wants to report that the meeting was a bust? D.L Moody preached his last sermon at the Great Convention Hall in Kansas City MO on November 16, 1899. his message title was, 'Excuses.' He died on December 22 of that same year, never seeing the 20th century. Before the days when Rex Humbard would become the father of modern day televangelism, D.L. Moody is credited with aiding in the development of the modern newspaper as they were used for creating the great wave of interest in this one very public evangelist and the meetings in general. Preachers were becoming celebrities and icons. Again, as with Finney, so with Moody, the 'new measures' of using the press was in itself not a bad thing. But is was like giving a six year old a gun for the incompetent. Some people simply cannot handle the popularity and the pressure to compromise becomes enormous for a host of reasons. Suddenly numbers were being printed in the papers. Attendances numbers and numbers of 'hopefully converted'. Notice the term again hopefully converted. This is as far as men dared to go in their reporting of numbers; but as with anything, the boldness to intrude into those things which we know not, vainly puffed up by fleshly minds, eventually took the place of reason.
Before we move to our next point I must again state the importance of understanding the 'pressure' of reporting positive results in the press. This pressure was no doubt a major cause of the erosion of the criteria degeneration for what it meant to be saved. The world was becoming 'quantity minded' and not quality minded. The industrial revolution was weighing in heavily to the whole philosophy of life. More, more, more... faster, faster, faster....
YOU CAN "MEET" A STAR
As the "altar call'' became more common, the numbers that came forward increased. During the 1800's, the act of going forward to receive prayer was never considered the means of salvation. But through the changing of generations, the Biblical understanding of the sovereignty of God was slowly replaced by a modern "quick-fix" mentality. The "struggle of faith" and "praying through" was replaced by signing your name on a decision card. Billy Sunday was a very popular professional baseball player before becoming a minister. His method of preaching broke the mold by any standard. At times he would even have a baseball bat on the platform and utilize it during the preaching. He started out in the beginning like D.L. Moody, with the emphasis on individual counseling in the after meeting. But by the end of his career this was fading or faded completely.
Billy Sunday asked folk to come forward to shake his hand as an indicator that they were turning to Christ. This marked a strong turning point in the way in which altar calls changed. Consider how he was a ball player and many wanted to 'shake his hand'. No doubt many were sincere also. Early reports in the 1800's suggested that only 10% of the persons who went forward in an altar call were "hopefully saved." As the decades past, the percentage grew to as much as 30%. Then, much later, the number might be 50%. Until finally, by 1918, the newspapers reporting that everyone who "hit the sawdust trail" to shake Billy Sunday's hand were saved. The objectivity was all but gone and the emphasis on folk actually being born of the Spirit was being replaced with a simple decision.
A QUICK LOOK BACK
Earlier we determined that it was Charles Finney's 'new measures' that fell into the hands of careless ministers that led us to where we are today with the de-emphasis on the new birth. However, Finney believed that when a person was truly converted they should make a public profession of their faith. This was a departure from previous methods that simply took a ‘wait and see’ approach. Finney believed that a person could be brought to salvation at once after they had gone through the process of conversion. While under great conviction the people were often invited to sit in the ‘anxious seat’ in the front of the meeting place. These people would be counseled and prayed for in the 'anxious meeting' that night or the next day. Sometimes he would go to their house. During the meetings Finney would occasionally ask the people to stand up if they intended to serve Christ. Other times he called them forward once there was some certainty that they were saved. Again, being intentionally redundant here the term you frequently see used is, ‘hopefully converted.’ Not knowing the hearts of men, it is impossible to fully know who is saved; but upon seeing fruits of repentance and verifiable and compelling evidence- Finney would consider them ‘hopefully converted.’
THE END OF 'HOPEFUL' CONVERSIONS
Since God doesn't change, only the definition of what it meant to be” saved" was slowly changing. By 1918, a newspaper reported, " CONVERTS RUSHED TO GRASP HANDS OF BILLY SUNDAY." According to the media, "Publicly acknowledging their belief in Jesus Christ as their savior, and expressing their repentance for sin, 425 men, women and children of all ages and types, surged down the sawdust trail to the platform at the tabernacle last night to grasp the hand of Billy Sunday and to be enrolled as professing Christians." 100% of the people who went forward were considered "saved" because of their singular act and supposed mindset. Lost in the frenzy was the Biblical teaching of the sovereignty of God and the born-again experience. The terminology "hopeful conversion" was lost by the end of Billy Sunday's career. Within a 39-year span, "hopeful conversions" were replaced with "X number of people got saved."
__________________________________________
Notes:
PATRICK MACINTYRE, “The Scandal of Modern Evangelism” ©2005
"The Effective Invitation" . R. Alan Streett c. 1984
The Wycliffe Bible Commentary Copyright (c) 1962 by Moody Press
Quote originally taken from G. Campbell Morgan “A First Century Message to Twentieth Century Christians”, pp. 40-42)
Adam Clarke commentary on Matthew 5:32.
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=194
Persecution every Christian's Lot. (2 Tim. 3:12) (George Whitfield 1700’s)
“Ten Shekels and a Shirt” (Paris Reidhead sermon +-1965)
CHARLES G. FINNEY (Lectures on Revival Series)
