Further Comment to ChalliesREPLY TO TIM CHALLIES:
In a message dated 5/26/2009 4:15:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time, email@example.com writes:
Bob, I don't think that's accurate. I believe the majority of my readers would be baptistic (albeit Reformed and baptistic). Tim
I took time this morning to do something I have never done before -- that is, I read the Comments on your blog about Lovett's book. I was impressed by several comments which seem to have a rather good perspective on witnessing, particularly those comments by "Victoria."
If truth were known, I think we might realize that a very great number of those who are critical of evangelistic methodology at certain points owe their own awakening or conversion to the efforts of witnesses who may not have used methods which pass muster with the current "Reformed" camp of thinking.
It is rather paradoxical that the man who first proposed establishing the Banner of Truth Trust, and whose wealth made the Banner of Truth Trust a publishing establishment, Mr. D. J. W. CULLUM, was himself converted in what would be viewed as an "altar" type circumstance. The Banner of Truth of July 1971, has a short bio of Mr. Cullum, a multi-millionaire, and it says that "it was while kneeling at a morning service in St. George's Cathedral, Jerusalem on Christmas Day, that he received assurance of his salvation in Jesus Christ" (page 2, issue #93).
Ernest Reisinger, a disciple of anti-invitationist Iain Murray and the man who founded the "Reformed" Founders Ministries, even "prayed the prayer of the publican" on the occasion of his conversion (Ernest Reisinger, A Biography, page 20).
Sometime ago, I made a study of sorts of those who are authors of articles which critique "public invitations," the "sinner's prayer," etc., and to the extent that I could discover, the majority of them attribute their own conversion to methods which they now denounce. Some of those article are at this link -- http://writingsofbobross.tripod.com/1toc1.html
Again, Lovett's methodology is far less significant than those of the Reformed camp which practices infant baptism as its "evangelistic" method and alleges that infants born to Christians receive "regeneration" either before birth (per John Frame) or very soon after birth, per Shedd, Berkhof, Sproul, etc.
On the whole, I find the advocates of the Pedobaptist Reformed theology to be foremost in criticizing evangelistic methods of others while they make little to no effort at reaching the lost with any method whatsoever.
Bob L. Ross
COMMENTS: Send your comments to: