"I don't feel guilty" Ray Comfort/ Daily Evidence

Help me where I may be wrong brother but I believe Ray's main way of witnessing is to use the law. I believe he may be more right here for those who have already heard the gospel.

I believe the book of Acts is the correct way to witness to those who are lost as never really having heard the gospel correctly. They went everywhere preaching Jesus crucified and the Resurrection. They proclaimed Jesus Christ and repentance toward God with faith in Jesus Christ for salvation.

I believe we need to preach and proclaim Jesus Christ to a lost and dying world. I believe they need to be convicted more of what he did for them and what they are going to do with the good news of Jesus Christ than being convicted by the Law. It is not a good works salvation but a gift of salvation by his grace through faith.

Some don't want to use the 'Law' for anything yet how many people who say they are Christians can actually tell anyone why their are Christians? For what purpose did they repent? I was never given any Law when my time came.I was taken through the book of John and Romans and was introduced to the concept of sin. I really didn't know what was. So in my ignorance my initial sin, which I could think of of that time was listening to Metallica? I was very naive back then. This was 1990 during a Jerry Johnston 'Edge of Evil' conference.

When I look at the Commandments I can see the shadow of my own heart and the heart of man. There have been times when I bring them up to people when it comes to sin and will focus on one of them with a person and get them to reveal their own heart in light of it. If God is there He will bring conviction. Otherwise it is just a matter of sowing a seed.

by Brothertom on 2012/6/22 9:25:31

To be honest, I cringe a little when I see Ray Comfort "evangelize". It seems to me that he thinks trapping a person logically through the ministry of condemnation [the Law ] and then following it up with direct guilt association is evangelizing. Maybe rather than a person being seared because they are not feeling guilty, they are just not convicted through this methodology.

"For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness,

but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. "

and...."But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe.

For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."

I have led a few people to the Lord. I have never beat them with their own admission of sin, but have seen the Holy Spirit convict them of sin, and have seen His Love manifested to them, so that they desire a Savior. This is the nature of salvation; To be convicted of sin while desiring a savior.

Only the Holy Spirit of God can convict another. There are no other methods. "Christ and Christ crucified."...God so loved the world.......

To trap a person is wrong yet the sin within a persons heart will fell trapped anyway when the conviction of God comes upon them. I wonder, do you think it is better to share at least one of the commandments and show them how they cannot keep it and then allow them to back away from it by helping them with an excuse so that they know they aren't good enough and God understands? This is the conclusion that I come to with your post.

Everyone is different when it comes to evangelism. Some shout ( which I hate) and some are quiet with it. For me, I engage in conversation by asking questions and I will illustrate, for the person, what I am talking about and then ask them what they think. I watch body language and if I see they are cornered I will back up a little bit and maybe go done another rabbit trail that leads to the same thought, if that makes sense?

What is amusing is I have had a number of people enjoy talking to me because I am not pushing with my conversations. I think it is also why I have had many come to me in private, in the past, and ask for advice and even pray for a personal thing. I lay out what I think and why I think it. I listen to the other and if I have no answers I say it and I will tell them I will get back to them on that.

I see too many people carry their conversation like a person would in politics. Nothing but yelling and I am right , you are wrong , repent or die and so forth. I usually walk away from that and encourage others to do the same.

do you think it is better to share at least one of the commandments and show them how they cannot keep it and then allow them to back away from it by helping them with an excuse so that they know they aren't good enough and God understands?

My concern with the Ray Comfort method is that it is founded on a naive perception of the conscience.

Take for example our own SI community. How often have we seen rebukes regarding the way we treat each other. The great commandment is violated quite regularly amongst us. We fall short in our ability to consider others' interests and listen to them carefully. Yet we all know that "laying down the law" fails to fix the problem. Laying down the law cannot override the human propensity to justify or deny one's behavior ... or it simply doesn't produce enough guilt to produce change.

If this problem is so pervasive amongst "conscientious" believers, why would the Comfort method work better for unbelievers!?

Diane

The Holy Spirit

Amen brother! This is God’s great and mighty antidote: God’s solution for the human sin problem – just as promised in the Bible’s centerfold page: Jeremiah 31: “I will put my law in their hearts, I will write it on their minds”. :33

It’s God’s transformative work on the conscience.
It’s God himself dwelling within through relationship.

Amazing!

Diane

There have been numerous methods marketed in years past to assist the Believer in witnessing, each with their own success stories.

When I was a young woman it was "Evangelism Explosion" by D. James Kennedy. Now in recent years it is Ray Comfort.

When I took orientation classes to work as a counselor at the Crises Pregnancy Center, we were also taught strategies in how to get people to understand the horror of abortion, their own sinfulness, etc.

So, there are many strategies a body can use to get people to agree with you. But it likely will not result in life changing decisions.

Still.

While they all have their own merits, conviction of sin still resides with the Holy Spirit.

When one relies on any strategy you are working in the power of the flesh - and it is not hard to get people to agree with you IF you use psychology. Not hard at all - if you are charming enough.

Eventually, I learned at CPC to rely on the still small voice of the Holy Spirit to tell me what to say. When I did that my goal changed and that was to assist this person in their understanding of God's will for their lives. We encountered strange situations which required heavenly wisdom to know how to deal with it - I had no clue what to say, none. But when the Spirit told me to start talking I had no clue what I was going to say - the words just came. When one uses this strategy, you are left feeling you were indeed assisting the Holy Spirit in his work in this person's life.

Still, these strategies are not sin but if you depend on it to do the work of the Holy Spirit and work to box him in, I think one is bound to fail.

My opinion and experience...

Excellent posts Brothertom, Dianne. and ginnyrose!

I remember when I first heard “hell’s best kept secret” and I really enjoyed it. Then later on I saw how he evangelized using as his main focus the Law and I saw something, I felt as well as seeing in the book of acts, that it wasn’t quite right for every situation.

If you will notice in the book of Acts the apostles always depended on the Holy Spirit to convict the lost and their main focus was to preach Jesus to everybody that would listen. I haven’t read any place in the book of acts where they ever used the Law as their main approach to people, but it was always the message of Jesus Christ.

i think we do see as was said petter telling the jews in the first evengelical to repent ,and jews allready new the law and what it means to repent ,accoring to there own scripture so peter never needed to go through a list of sins ,,he did however tell them they killed the lord jesus them self that was more then likly what cut them to the heart vers 23 of seconed chapter of acts

YOU HAVE TAKEN ,BY LAWLESS HANDS ,

HAVE CRUSAFIED ,,,AND PUT TO DEATH

peter has used the law lawfully ,with the leading of the holy spirit

probably in the first 5 minuties of his preaching to lawfully condem the actions of the jew

so the preaching of christ crusafied ,and the resarection and the lawless deeds of the jews were all propagated in one message

so far the love of god was not mentioned as is evedent

peter also used the propherts of old to convict them of the resarection ,and even the mention of the asention to the fathers right hand was added

then just to make sure the jews were convicted of sin
the holy spirit through peter ,,again convicts them the seconed time of mudering jesus on the cross

then they were cut to the heart by the holy spirit

then as we know HE SAID REPENT

AND ITS TRUE ,he said many other things after this first exortation

BE SAVED ,FROM THIS PERVERSE GENERATION

he by the holy spirit labled the whole generation

PERVERSE

this sort of preaching would be concidered over the top and condeming my many people

now im not advocation this ,,,but the love of god was not mentioned by luke ,,,,,

the gosple was preached by peter along with convicting language regarding the peoples sins

he did not in any way just preach christ crusafied and the love of god in a shalow narrow scence ,,as we see many doing to day

then we see the next recorded preaching of peter

the first thing he said to the amased jews
who were stunded by the mirical ,in much perplexedy

YOU DELIEVER UP ,GODS SERVENT JESUS TO PILATE
YOU DENIED THE HOLY ONE
YOU KILLED THE PRINCE OF LIFE ACTS 3..13 AND 14

WE SEE againg peter moved by the holy spirit
convicting them of murder

these were hard hearted jews who believed they did nothing wrong ,,peter more or less used the law that they new and aplyed to them ,,,,he did not need to say

you shall not kill ,, they allready new that comand

verses 19,a few minutes later ,he comands them by the holy spirit to REPENT ,,
THEN GOES TO the law and the propherts, to bulster his convictings words ,in vers 22

and uses the prophecy from the one moses who gave the law
to reveal the condemnation ,these men will experance
if they do not repent and believe this message ,wich is truly good news about christ and his salvation

some believed ,others had them arested ,after phisicaly restraing them

this gopsle peter was preaching was not a waterd down version we see today in some chruches is it

imagin the upraw that this gosple produced
imagin brethern the upraw this would produe to day

imagin the upraw ,that weasly and whitfield prodused
preaching a similar gosple

just think the next day after this preacher peter such convicting mesage ,,he againg in custady chapter 4 verss 8/ 12
he boldy said again YOU KILLED HIM ,BUT GOD RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD

no hey brethern, god loves you ,so come be baptise ,make a confessions that jesus is lord ,and pray a prayer with me ect ect

now im not saying dont say god loves you as such

my point is the goplse preacherd by peter was powerfull and it mentiond to the hearers with out argument that they had sinned ,and what sin it was

iv read that part of acts so many times i even memorised a good pourshen ,,,,but the more i read it slowly i see the message was always combined with the idea of reptence and the showing the listener that they have broken gods law

blessings brethren

Ray also has said in his basic course and I will paraphrase. That you do not always have to take people through the law. You may encounter someone who is already fully convicted and humble. You then reveal Jesus to them.

Every single human operates according to laws formed in their conscience. How are those laws formed? How does morality take shape in the conscience? Is it the proverbial "slap on the wrist"? That assumption is a gross over simplification.

While we wish to acknowledge the role of the Spirit, we also must acknowledge the place of human relationship and attachment as a vital means for the formation of conscience. (and remember, The Spirit works through relationship as well: our relationship with God)

Therefore I quote a portion of the research summery which arose out of a massive government-sponsored study by professionals in response to the crisis of adolescence in our society. The Study is called "Hard-wired to connect".
---------

The Moralization of Attachment

The beginning of morality is the biologically primed moralization of attachment. This “born-to-attachness” is the essential foundation for the emergence of conscience and of moral meaning. The human child is talked into talking and loved into loving.
Moralization is a value-driven sense of oughtness which emerges within specific human behavioral systems governing attachment (bonding), emotional regulation (mood stability), cognitive processing (thinking), and volition (will). Human connectedness guides the child’s readiness to behave in response to parent wishes and attentiveness. (Stillwell)

The absence of connectedness has the same symptoms in children who’d been deprived of their mothers:
– superficial relationships
– poverty of feeling for others
– inaccessibility
– lack of emotional response
– often pointless deceitfulness and theft
– inability to concentrate in school

The moral needs of children are not merely personal and private, but also social and shared. The ongoing development of morality in later childhood and adolescence involves the human capacity to idealize individuals and ideas. The moralization of attachment later extends outward to the larger community, making possible a growing cognitive capacity, widening networks of relationships, and
new and additional sources of moral meaning. This facilitates the human capacity for awe, worship, and idealization. (Gutmann)

Moral development in later childhood and adolescence requires role models. We tend to imitate in moral terms: We become those whom we admire. We imitate moral conduct often discussed as pro-social.
The protective impact of extra-familial adult relationships for young people is well demonstrated by numerous researchers. That includes other adult relatives, friends' parents, teachers, or adults in health and social service setting. A sense of connectedness to adults is a protective factor against an array of health-jeopardizing behaviors of adolescents, and has protective effects for both girls and boys across various ethnic, racial and social class groups.

----------------------------------

I will add more of the document later: “The Spiriutalization of Attachment.”

Diane