[chette777]

Acts 17 is a perfect example of no law being preached and people being saved.

So Is Ray comfort's way of the master a Biblically correct way to witness or street preach?

with the Jews Paul uses scripture but to prove Christ is the Messiah not to convict Jews of sin and not keeping the law. When Paul speaks of the law being lawful when used lawfully he is not speaking of witnessing but a lifestyle.

when Paul speaks of the Law being school master leading them to Christ. He is speaking to Jews as to the purpose of the law. not to convict of Gentiles of sin.

With the Gentiles in Acts 17, Paul uses Philosophic and Stoick reasoning and their own poets to point to judgement of the dead by Christ whom God raised from the dead. he did not try to get them to see if they kept all the laws of the Jews but rather said that nature and ll things created were to help them find God if they so felt moved by those to find Him.

I think the reason men create these methods is because of lack of faith that men will beleive the simple gospel. so in order to be able to count how many came to Christ you would need systems of evangelism that were only developed in these last days of the last days.

[peopleoftheway]

Exactly Brother Chette!
Courses / programs that men have designed, another horrible example if I may give is the alpha course and I would like at some point in time to write an article on this, as billboards and posters have appeared all over my home town and outside some Churches. But back to "way of the master" it sounds more like a martial arts movie than anything pertaining to the Gospel of The LORD Jesus Christ.

[Forrest]

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:" (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

Hello Brother Chette. Men do indeed complicate and, in many cases, corrupt the gospel of Christ--making it fit their particular level of understanding or frame of reference. Like you, I also believe that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by Him. We should not "add" to the simplicity of Christ and the message of redemption.

I do not know Brother Ray Comfort personally, but I've always sensed that he simply puts a lot of emphasis on "how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures" by using the the Law to show that Jesus Christ died for our sins. I love that verse in 1 John that says He is "...the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

I certainly believe it's permitted for us to use the "Ten Commandments" to show a person his or her sinfulness and need of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. In saying that, I firmly believe that if we simply preach Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, men will be saved. He is enough!

[chette777]

I agree. it is not harmful to use the ten commandments to show you can't keep them. but at the same time you are telling people in essence they must keep them. so after salvation you have people trying to keep them(mind you not all). the the essence of law keeping or lack there of is the basis of their need of salvation, not conviction of the Holy Ghost that Christ Died for them and bore ALL their sin upon the tree. not just their lack of not keeping ten commandments. the truth is Chrsit died to keep anyone who would beleive from going to Eternal punishment because of God righteous decree that the soul that sins shall die.

What do they do when they come across some one who has kept all the Ten Commandments? Paul said he did.

but I wont cut fellwoship with Ray or anyone using the way of the master. but always better to keep it simple, teach it simple.

[TheBibleSender]

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? [Is] the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

What is Paul saying here. He is saying that is was the law that showed him his sin. God bless.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by chette777

...but at the same time you are telling people in essence they must keep them.

What do they do when they come across some one who has kept all the Ten Commandments? Paul said he did.

I suppose that could, and probably does, happen. I honestly don't know exactly how others use the law to preach the Gospel of Christ. But whenever I use the law, for example, I trust the Holy Spirit to use God's perfect written law in order to reveal the fact that they cannot possibly keep them.

Personally, I've never witnessed to anyone who has passed the test of the "Ten Commandments." One lie? One lust? One theft? One time taking God's name in vain? How many times do you need to lie in order to be a liar? Instead of implying they must keep the law, I think the trust of many who are using the law as a schoolmaster, is to allow the Holy Spirit to show a person the impossibility of keeping or obeying the law. Remember, we also teach, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).

You said, "What do they do when they come across some one who has kept all the Ten Commandments? Paul said he did."

When did the Apostle Paul say he came across individuals who actually kept the Ten Commandments? I can't recall at this time. Remind me of the Scripture for that.

I could see the possibility of coming across someone who "claims" to be a keeper of the law. Do you think there are persons who have actually kept every commandment, all of their life? Every thought? Every word? Every deed?

[chette777]

My point is in the scriptures not even Paul uses the law to convict Gentiles of sin.

list out all of Paul's preachings in the book of Acts he never uses the law. but many were saved. What make Ray's way better than Paul's?

[peopleoftheway]

Hey Chette
I will agree that Ray Comfort is sound in most scripture, as I'm sure brother Luke was as he was one time involved in Rays teaching, there is something horribly wrong with his route to salvation, in a exert from his website he states the way to salvation is this.
You must turn away from sin and turn to God. Desire to have NOTHING to do with sin, and surrender your life to the One who can save you.

Now, I don't know about anyone else here on this forum but I was so completely entrenched in my sins and overwhelmed by them that I had NO OTHER CHOICE but to carry my sins wrapped up in the rags of my life and take them to The LORD Jesus Christ, to the foot of the cross and say "Please LORD, I CANNOT BEAR THIS ON MY OWN, SAVE ME FOR I AM NOTHING AND YOU ARE ALL", for I could not save myself.

Psalms 116:13
I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the LORD.
Romans 10:13
For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.


To ask someone, especially someone who was in my situation, whereby my sin was leading me to destruction to first, "turn away from sin" is horribly wrong! Our sin must be carried to the foot of that blessed cross where our LORDS precious blood was shed for the remission of our sins, we turn TO Christ WITH our sins, not turn away from sins so we can to turn to Christ.

Matthew 26:28
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Romans 3:25
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway

To ask someone, especially someone who was in my situation, whereby my sin was leading me to destruction to first, "turn away from sin" is horribly wrong! Our sin must be carried to the foot of that blessed cross where our LORDS precious blood was shed for the remission of our sins, we turn TO Christ WITH our sins, not turn away from sins so we can to turn to Christ.

That's right Brother POTW! Inviting or encouraging a person to turn away from sin before turning to Christ is not possible and promotes a "works" oriented salvation.

Brother Chette, I agree with you.

You wrote, "My point is in the scriptures not even Paul uses the law to convict Gentiles of sin. list out all of Paul's preachings in the book of Acts he never uses the law. but many were saved. What make Ray's way better than Paul's?"

Ray's way of using the law is not better, of course, but I think it's a way though to lead people to Jesus. I'm saying that the Holy Spirit can use the Law of God to bring awareness and conviction to the hearts of men in order to show the need of salvation which is through Christ Jesus.

Jesus Christ must be preached. He is the hope of glory. "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice" (Philippians 1:15-18).

[Luke]

Ray's method comes about from failing to rightly divide.

His motto, WDJD, is a play on WWJD, but stands for What Did Jesus Do.

So instead of looking to the pauline epistles to see what needs to be done during this age, he looks to the gospels. Mainly John, which doesn't even mention repentance, but then he has a major focus on matthew as well.

While I admit that I have been neglecting personal soul winning because of struggles in my life (which is no excuse), I have in the past used both Romans Road method and Ray's method.

Each of them seem to be aiming for the same thing. A decision for Christ. The only difference I see is that Ray's method adds the words "Repent from your sins (confess them)" to the prayer at the end.

When I get back out on the streets, I pray that the Holy Spirit will guide me, with just the Bible.


Ironside defines repentance like this, and I agree : Repentance is the sinner's recognition of and acknowledgment of his lost estate and, thus, of his need of grace. Repentance is the recognition of my sinnership -- the owning before God that I am as vile as He has declared me to be in His holy Word.

Ray would say something like this : A sinner will not repent until he sees his need for grace.

So Ray adds an extra step. Ironside says that repentance IS the recognition of sin. Ray says repentance comes AFTER recognising sin.

According to Ironside there are two steps - Repent (admit you are a sinner) and Believe the Gospel
According to Ray there are three - Admit you are a sinner, Turn from sins, and Believe the Gospel