I got a chance to listen to Jesse Johnson’s message from the 2012 Shepherd’s Conference titled The Way(s) of the Master this morning, and I must say it was challenging and gave me a lot to chew on. Jesse began the lecture by giving an overview of the various methods of evangelism, some effective and some not so effective. Because of its popularity and success among the Church today, the focus of the message was on Ray Comfort’s Way of the Master.
I thought Jesse did a fine job in qualifying his lecture with his respect and appreciation for WOTM and he made clear his desire to come alongside as a brother on the same team to see how we can be more biblical in our approach to evangelism. WOTM has certainly been instrumental in preparing me for effective and biblical evangelism, and I am very thankful for this ministry and consider it a great honor and delight to serve beside saints affiliated with WOTM and hundreds who have been positively impacted by it. So I very much appreciated Jesse’s humility and candor in addressing this topic.
Ultimately, the proper use of the Law is what drives this lecture and whether there is one approach to biblical evangelism. I’d like to have a discussion on Jesse’s points and any other comments you might have with this method of using the law. Has Jesse given you something to consider? Will you change how you share the Gospel in light of his arguments? Let’s discuss it after you get a chance to listen.
Go here for download: The Way(s) of the Master
airō 
Josh Elsom
March 16, 2012
Way of the Master is method evangelism, no matter how hard people might try and argue to the contrary. Consider the WDJD acronym in the seal you’ve posted above. That doesn’t make it bad; methods aren’t bad, it is only when we place our hope in the power of a method that the good milk sours. I thank God for Ray and Hell’s Best Kept Secret, it was a life changer for me. It gave me confidence to share my faith and a worldwide community of friends, through the Ambassadors’ Alliance. It was/is a good template for me in my sharing Jesus. I do, however, think Jesse brings up some fair critiques. It does sound mechanical, scripted, and too often impersonal. There is so much emphasis on the power of the Law to convert, that it is easy to forget that we are speaking to Image Bearers and not marks. Just repeat the formula and if they don’t repent then it’s because they are just too proud.
Some of Jesse’s teaching, I am still sorting my way through. In particular, is his antinomianism. Are the 10 Commandments for the Gentiles or for the Jews, only? Well, the first commandment is preceded by an indicative statement, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” That is redemption for a particular people. This is followed by the imperative “thou shalt nots…” Of those imperatives, the first four could only be kept by a covenant people. He may have a point.
Either way, we need to take his critique and exegetical arguments seriously. If it isn’t truly the only way of Jesus, or a properly understood way, then we wouldn’t want to use it, right?
Justin Edwards
March 16, 2012
Thanks for your comment, Josh. I share in your appreciation from the wealth of training I have received from LW, and more importantly the fellowship of the saints as a result! WOTM helped me structure in a systematic way my understanding of the Gospel and presenting it to the lost. This further served as a template as I delved into a deeper understanding of the Gospel and how it works, and I ultimately fully embraced the doctrines of grace. So I am incredibly thankful for the Lord’s work at LW.
As I have grown, I have come away from the script (so to speak) and have learned to adapt to any conversation. This is the result of God’s grace working in me and I’m thankful He continues to give me greater understanding and the ability to convey the truths of Scripture in an adaptable, more conversational manner.
I still think we use the law in evangelism, but the question for me is whether the basis for our use of the law is in the 10 commandments or the law of Christ. It’s still right to ask the question, “have you ever told a lie?” ….and….”what does that make you?”, but is it because of the 9th commandment or is it because the immorality of lying has been written to our conscious? I suppose either way, lying is wrong because God is not a liar, and we know it is wrong because we are made in His image and our conscious bears witness to this. Romans 2:12-16 seems to answer a lot of these questions.
On a slightly different but related note, you might appreciate this article from a few months ago: https://airocross.com/2011/11/21/make-much-of-christ/
julie
March 16, 2012
I had a tough time following Jesse’s lecture…but I agree with the overall idea that a one size fits all approach to evangelism does not work. It doesn’t work because each of us is different, each person we talk to is different and each situation is different. I usually don’t have 30 minutes to take someone through the 10 commandments. I have to trust the Holy Spirit of God to so work on someone’s heart that they will come to an understanding of their sin, after having given them the gospel. And ultimately, we have to get to the gospel! Whatever you do, give them the gospel for the gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Not guilt, not broken commandments, not human argumentation, or methods or what have you. We might get halfway through a scripted method and suddenly the encounter is interrupted and we never got to the gospel! Also, Comfort’s approach to me seems very heavy handed. Someone with a forceful and strong personality who can look someone in the eye and tell them that they are an adulterer, murderer, a liar, etc. might be able to bring someone to a feeling of guilt and condemnation. Yet the human heart can certainly step in at that point and convince a person that they are not that bad, this person is crazy, or whatever to get them to deny the truth. Sin is hardening and blinding…so ultimately we are dependent, not on our forceful presentation, but the Holy Spirit of God, who alone can break through the hard heart and bring the unsaved person under conviction and ultimately to faith in Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit is certainly not bound to certain approaches, otherwise the scriptures would be careful to lay that out for us..which it does not do, except to tell us that it is the gospel which is the power of God. That Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, that He was buried and that He rose again from the dead according to the scriptures…1 Cor 15:1-6; Romans 1:16
Larry
March 18, 2012
They ARE preaching the Gospel. The Gospel is more than just saying that Christ died for your sins, was buried, and rose again. If that was the case then our sermons would last about 15 seconds and we could all go home. Paul certainly did much more than that.
Who God is.
What sin is.
How we are separated from God.
What God requires, perfect holiness.
Who Jesus is.
What Jesus did.
What we must do to be saved. Our response. Repent and believe (trust in Christ).
That is the Gospel. Includes the bad news along with the good news. God is sovereign and can save people anyway He chooses. We just need to be faithful to preach the whole counsel of God. When Jesus was on the rode to Emmaus what did He do? He said much more than that. “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Luke 24:27
Justin Edwards
March 18, 2012
Hi Larry, thanks for the comment. I agree with what you have said and do not see where I or Jesse or anyone else in the conversation has alluded that the LW does not preach anything more or less than what you have listed above. The issue at hand is not whether or not to use the law to bring about the conviction of sin through the Holy Spirit, but should the basis for using the law be the 10 commandments or the law written to the conscious of Gentiles? This is something I will be studying through.
Dennis Cain
March 19, 2012
“…look someone in the eye and tell them that they are an adulterer, murderer, a liar, etc…” He never tells them that. All Ray does is repeat back to the person what they have already admitted themselves. “You told me you are a…” or you have admitted to being a…”
“We might get halfway through a scripted method and suddenly the encounter is interrupted and we never got to the gospel!” That has happened to me several times, either by the person breaking it off or some outside interference. But God is Sovereign and I rest upon Proverbs 16:1 in all my witness encounters and trust that what was said is what God decreed to be said in that instance.
Amy2
March 17, 2012
If I didn’t know running a stop sign was against the law, I wouldn’t understand why a police officer is giving me a ticket; I also wouldn’t feel badly about what I did. The whole reason we are (were) under condemnation is because we have transgressed God’s law. Adam didn’t have all the law, but he broke the law he did have, and under that law, we all came under the sentence of (physical) death. We deserved to be crucified, and so we were “crucified with Christ.” We are no longer under it’s jurisdiction, because dead men don’t have to obey the law. It does however remain in affect, as Romans says, it is “holy, just and good.” That has not changed, and that is why it needs to be shown to people. It is still “our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.” There are examples of different styles of evangelism, but Scripture doesn’t indicate anything else that will indeed “bring us to Christ” the fulfillment of the law.
Justin Edwards
March 18, 2012
Hi Amy, please see my response to Larry. Also, what do you read in Romans 2:12-16:
“For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”
How can we read this text any other way but that the Gentiles were not given the Mosaic Law? Again, this question and more is what I am working through. To be clear, it’s not that Gentiles are not accountable to any law, the question is what law? I submit it may be the law of Christ, which is actually a higher standard (adultery, lust, divorce, etc.).
As a side note, I found myself preaching at the abortion mill yesterday using the law, but I did so in a manner that declared God had written his law to their conscious, therefore they know lying, stealing, and murder etc. are wrong. When they lie, steal, and murder (hate) they are liars, thieves, and murderers and stand guilty before our holy God. Moreover, lying and stealing etc. are wrong, not because they are arbitrary rules from God etched in stone, but because God is not a liar or a thief. We are made in the image of God and He has written His law to our conscious, and when we break these laws, we are in violation against and offend His very nature. We are in rebellion against who God made us to be – which is to glorify Him and love Him with all of our hearts, mind, soul and strength. We are in rebellion against God’s character and against God Himself – these are inseparable. In any case, I did not find any difficulty in preaching in this manner, and felt very comfortable in doing so because it seems this is what Scripture teaches.
Justin Edwards
March 19, 2012
The following is taken from a discussion on facebook. Tony Miano had shared a link to another lecture at the Shepherd’s Conference by Dr. Richard Mayhue and I found it to be extremely helpful and recommend all listen. The fb discussion is here: http://www.facebook.com/airo7/posts/341552872548611 and Dr. Mayhue’s message can be found here: http://www.shepherdsconference.org/media/details/?mediaID=6783
Here’s my comment:
Tony, thank you again for posting Dr. Mayhue’s message. It cleared up much for me and helped me better understand the Mosaic Law and the law under the New Covenant. Though not diligently, I have been pondering these things recently and his message has affirmed much for me.
With that said, I am having trouble making a distinction between what Dr. Mayhue has said and what Jesse said in their respective lectures. Though it seems Mayhue distinguished himself from NCT’ers because of what appears to be a dominant covenantal eschatology, he does seem to embrace NCT with regards to the law. The following is what I have been considering or have learned over the weekend and Dr. Mayhue (and Jesse) seem to affirm some or all of these things:
1) God’s moral law, whether codified or not, is eternal. This is because God’s moral law is representative of His moral character, which does not change.
2) The Mosaic Law was given to Israel only, not the Gentiles.
3) The Mosaic Law is one law, and no where in Scripture do we find it broken up into three sections (moral, civil, and ceremonial). The Law has elements of each, but there are not 3 divisions.
4) The Old Covenant is not binding upon the believer today as the believer today is under the authority of the New Covenant (the law of Christ).
So what does this mean in our evangelism? I am still working through this, but it seems to me if believers are no longer under the Old Covenant but the New Covenant, then non-believers are no longer under the demands of the Old Covenant but are under the demands of the New Covenant. Therefore, using the 10 Commandments (the Old Covenant) to bring the conviction of sin through the Holy Spirit does not have a biblical basis under the New Covenant. Why?
1) Because the 10 Commandments, as part of the entire Mosaic Law that included 613 laws, was given to the nation of Israel, not to Gentiles.
2) God’s Law is written to the Gentile’s heart and their conscious bears witness to this (Romans 2:14-15).
Now again, why is God’s moral law eternal and why are we eternally bound to keep it? It is because God’s moral law flows from God’s being, from His character, from His moral nature. Before Genesis 1:1, lying was wrong because God is not a liar and stealing was wrong because God is not a thief. This was true before the 10 commandments and it is true after the 10 commandments were given. The “10 commandments” are not what defines the moral law of God like an arbitrary list of rules, but the moral law is representative of God’s moral character and THAT is what defines the commandments. So, although the Mosaic Law once had authority, it no longer has this authority as their has come a new covenant.
Now, the Gentiles have never had the Mosaic Law, but they have always been accountable to the moral law of God that is written to their hearts. So even under the New Covenant era, Gentiles are still accountable and responsible for breaking God’s moral law because this is an offense against His moral character. When we lie, we aren’t just breaking a law, we are rebelling against the holy nature of God and we are rebelling against who God IS, and we, who have been made in His likeness, are rebelling against who God made us to be – a people to glorify Him.
So, we are lawbreakers, not because we have broken the 10 commandments, but because we have rebelled against who God IS. God is not a liar, but when we lie, WE are liars and are at enmity with the holiness of God.
I hope this has made sense. I understand it doesn’t encompass all arguments, but may be a decent summary of the issues as I understand it. Please share your agreements or disagreements and I look forward to continuing the discussion with you brothers. (brother Dustin S. Segers, I especially would like to here your take on my assessment).
wes
March 19, 2012
Very good conversation. Thank you for sharing this. I have been grappling with some of this for a while now and listening to Jesse Johnson’s teaching has also caused me to think about this. I will be studying more on the law and it’s usage in the NT in the context of the passage. I also providentially have “Law and Grace” by McClain in my hands as well. This has really challenged me to which I say thank you.
Michael Coughlin
March 19, 2012
Sin is defined as far more than just “transgression of the law.” James 4 says sin is to not do good when you know to do good, and Romans 14 says anything done NOT out of faith is sin. So the 10 commandments don’t have to be the ONLY way you can help someone see their sin, but I find some of the commandments to be understood well by the conscience of the person.
The problem with avoiding “the law” altogether and simply appealing to conscience is that you are not making man the judge. I know people who do not have a conscience about certain things…they need the “schoolmaster” to show them their sin, like Amy’s stop sign ticket example above. To only appeal to what law has been written on a heart of man is missing the mark, I believe and allowing the man to be the judge of right and wrong. Men do need God’s character and holiness revealed to them at times, although they are without excuse. The goal is to be helpful to people to aid in their understanding.
But I do not tell people they will be judged by the 10 commandments when I evangelize. The only person I’d even bother with a sabbath question to would be a Jew. I’ve made a 7th Day Adventist mad with a tract because it had excluded the 4th commandment.
Nevertheless, how do you explain to a nonbeliever that there are ceremonial laws, moral, etc…you cannot. They cannot understand spiritual things apart from Christ and the Holy Spirit, but that is exactly to Whom you are trying to introduce them! Viscious circle. So you have to start somewhere…The 10 commandments are well known in general. They are a good “measuring stick” for morality (assuming the sabbath is properly understood but that’s a different issue).
It doesn’t bother me to tell someone that they’ve lied and broken God’s commands any more than when I reference His character instead as the measuring stick. It depends on the person. What I avoid and always have is telling them lying is wrong because of the 9th commandment. But I don’t think you cannot reference the well-known commands to lead people in the right direction. It just might not be “logically sound.”
With the somewhat changing nature (from a nonbeliever’s perspective) of some of God’s commands (like ceremonial laws, pre-fall rules (only 1), etc), to get a nonbeliever to at understand is a challenge and a work of God anyway. I think the primary critique concerning “THE” Way of the Master is somehow the idea which is communicated, whether intentionally or not that you cannot possibly present the gospel without also presenting “the law in the form of at least a few of the 10 commandments.” As if no one can be saved if you don’t do it “that way.” Ray and Tony have openly discussed that this is not their intention, that you can present God’s character manifested through His law in other ways than always driving people to a Good Person Test (see on the box episode).
Thanks for the thoughtful post and comments.
scot brandon
March 22, 2012
One of the comments on Pastor Jesse Johnson wall on facebook after posting the link to Way(s) of the Master.
“The problem is that now I cannot do the way of the master approach, after listening to your lecture. Now back to square one .”
Just speculating that “square one” is back to NOT evangelizing like many were doing before learning WOTM. That is the issue I have with Jesse.
The question remains is WOTM biblical? If it is Woe to Jesse, and the Shepherd Conference for lack of discernment. I think WOTM is bibical because it is based on law and grace. When you get rid of either your off into either legalism or antinomianism (worldliness).
The 10 commandments are a practical way for showing people their sin like Jesus did, with the young rich ruler (Luke 18) and the woman at the well (John 4). After listening to the critique by Jesse it may have left you with more questions than answers for verses like these below.
Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.
(1 John 3:4 ESV) Lawlessness in breaking laws so what laws?
For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.
(Romans 4:15 ESV) What law?
So breaking God’s law is sin “sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4) and “where there is no law there is no transgression (sin) (Romans 4:15) So what law is this talking about, seems like the commentaries don’t like to come out and say the 10 commandments. Hopefully, this will clear it up if you’re confused.
What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” (Romans 7:7 ESV)
“if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin” (Romans 7:7) sounds familiar to the other verses “sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4) …”no law no sin” (Rom 4:15)
So what law? Paul says explains “For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” (Romans 7:7)
What law is “You shall not covet”? It’s the 10th commandment (Exodus 20:17).
Paul is referring to the 10 commandments in Romans 7:7, which tie in with 1 John 3:4, and Romans 4:15.
Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.(Romans 3:19-20 ESV)
“whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law,” who is under the law?
The verse tells “every mouth” is stopped by and “the whole world” may be accountable to God….(Romans 3:19) Everyone is under the law in this respect although we know that those in Christ are no longer under it. It brings people to the cross, that is it’s intention. (Galations 3:24) yet we are not allowed to break it just because were not under it through faith in Christ.
Paul explains at the end of the chapter 3 we uphold the law as believers.
Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:29-31 ESV)
We can concluded that the law mentioned in Romans chapters 3,4, 7 and 1 John 3, and Galatians 3 are in fact referring to the 10 commandments.
We wouldn’t conclude differently unless some really smart guy stood up on the pulpit and told us differently and we believed him, but if we let the scripture interpret scripture we see that Paul used the 10 commandments to bring about knowledge of sin, and he didn’t preach antinomialism that we could just ignore them when we are saved.
What law do we uphold ? How about 10 commandments that were summed up in two commandments by Jesus in Matthew 22:37-40.
Justin Edwards
March 22, 2012
Hi Scot, thanks for your thorough comment with providing numerous Scriptures. I don’t think Jesse, nor anyone that I have discussed this with including myself, have said anything about throwing out the law or grace. Personally, I have consistently said we still use the law, but my question is what is our basis for doing so. Moreover, Christians are indeed under law, just not the Old Covenant Law but the Law of Christ. With this said, what is your interpretation of Romans 2:14-15?
scot brandon
March 24, 2012
Justin, people have God’s law written on their hearts. I believe that Romans 2:14-15 is referring to that and our God given conscience.
Blessings,
Scot
Justin Edwards
March 25, 2012
Thanks, Scot. How do you then reconcile this with your previous comment?
scotbrandon
March 26, 2012
I think those commandments are written on our hearts. I don’t feel I have to reconcile it. I could of added that verse to my post to make the point. I think there is continuity between all the chapters in Romans. I expanded on my view here.
https://theplentifulharvest.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/the-way-s-of-the-master-critique-of-the-critique/
Canyon Shearer
March 23, 2012
I realize I’m coming in way late on this conversation, but I feel there is something I can add. I’ve listened to this sermon and came away seriously grieved, knowing nothing of the preacher, I can only say that he seems dangerous and misled based on what I’ve heard. By rejecting the biblical definition of the sin based on the law (1 John 3:4), and quoting Mark Cahill and Tim Keller and Bill Hybels, he’s shown that he is seriously undiscerning…but that’s probably all been said.
Here is what I can add: The Way of the Master is NOT, “Would you consider yourself to be a good person?” The Way of the Master is “Law to the proud, grace to the humble.” This is the ONLY way to biblically evangelize, there are methods of “good person tests” and “are you good enough to go to Heaven” and “if God asks why should I let you in, what are you going to say?”, but the overarching principle is the Way of the Master; it is not a method, it is the only biblical foundation, and therefore there cannot be Way(s) of the Master; and Ray Comfort is not the Master, Jesus Christ is the Master and he has only one way.
And finally, if someone can’t go to Heaven by keeping the commandments, then how did Jesus get to Heaven? This sermon was horrendous, unedifying, and had no redemptive traits.
“Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.” – Philippians 4:8-9
For Christ and his bride,
Canyon
Justin Edwards
March 25, 2012
Hey Canyon,
Thanks for chiming in. Do you recall where Jesse rejected the 1 John 3:4 definition of sin in his message, and also where he said someone cannot go to heaven by keeping the law?
I’d be interested in getting your thoughts from the following message by Richard Mayhue, Dean of TMS, titled “Still Written in Stone? The Christian’s Relationship to the Mosaic Law”: http://www.shepherdsconference.org/media/details/?mediaID=6783
I found it to be very helpful to this discussion and I learned of it from Tony in this discussion on my fb wall.
Thanks brother!
Canyon Shearer
March 28, 2012
This sermon is excellent! I’m going to repost it. I’ve read/heard many of these things before, and preached many of these things before, but this is an excellent short/succinct sermon on the law. 🙂
Justin Edwards
March 28, 2012
Great, glad you enjoyed it, brother. Regarding Jesse’s point on the use of the law, did you find that he and Mayhue agree?
Canyon Shearer
March 29, 2012
I don’t think they agree at all, Mayhue is focusing mostly on post conversion, where Jesse is focusing on pre conversion. Mayhue says the Christian is freed from the law, where-as Johnson makes the point that the Gentile was never under the law.
Somehow I missed your question from the 25th, I don’t recall where he said said either thing, but I remember the 1 John 3:4 definition skirted when he said Gentiles aren’t required to keep the law, and that someone can’t go to Heaven by the law I believe is nearly a direct quote. I unfortunately don’t desire to listen to his sermon again to give the exact time-markers, but I believe both are clear in his sermon, and were two major red-flags that jumped out at me.
Joe
March 24, 2012
1 Timothy 1:8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,
raisinggodlychildren
March 27, 2012
I find it interesting that Jesse who gave the (online sermon critique of WOTM) contradicts John MacArthur’s commentary….Take for example Romans 3:19
Rom. 3:19 those . . . under the law. Every unredeemed human being. Jews received the written law through Moses (3:2), and Gentiles have the works of the law written on their hearts (2:15), so that both groups are accountable to God. every mouth . . . stopped . . . accountable. There is no defense against the guilty verdict God pronounces on the entire human race. McArthur Study Bible
The author states that Romans 3:19 has nothing to do with the Gentiles…WRONG
Spurgeon on Romans 3:19
That is the true condition of the whole world, “guilty before God.” This is the right attitude for the whole human race, to stand with its finger on its lip, having nothing to say as to why it should not be condemned…The nineteenth-century world as well as the world of the first century, all the world, in all time, has “become guilty before God.”
I’ll be honest, I stopped listening to the sermon at that point. When Jesse attempted to say that Romans 3:19 only refers to the Jews under the law. It just became semantics to me. I’ve read the Puritans, Spurgeon, Reidhead, and many other “preachers of old” and they knew the important of using the Moral law of God in evangelism, to prepare a sinners heart to receive the gospel. Remember, the Holy Spirit brings conviction (John 16:8) and conviction comes through the work of the Law and realizing that one cannot keep the law, which ultimately leads us to Christ (Romans 7:9, Gal 3:24)…..
I’m surprised this critique was given at such a big platform, considering I believe it’s just semantics. Look at the fruit of WOTM. No other “method” of evangelism has produced and equipped so many street ministry teams, OAP, etc…..
Dave Porter
April 1, 2012
I found it interesting that Jesse said something like I am almost certain that Spurgeon, Whitefield, and Luther were not endorsing the use of the ten commandments in evangelism. I have found quotes from all 3 using the 10 commandments.
torreycourierevangelism
July 21, 2012
Scott Brandon you said it all! Thank you very much. Except you missed 1 Timothy 1:8-10. But Joe slipped it in there so were good. The W.O.T.M is not a method. It is Biblical Evangelism as Canyon Shearer explained so well. It can be different depending on the person and the circumstances. It is Law to the Proud and grace to the humble. Galatians 3:24 say’s it all.