I explained that if the seed of God's Word had been planted in her, then she would come to faith. Then she could "go down the aisle" on Sunday and share what God had done. My explanation fell on deaf ears. I had missed the opportune time, and if she never came to Christ, I would have to bear her damnation on my conscience for eternity, he retorted.

In the ensuing months, God granted me many opportunities to speak personally with this lady about her spiritual condition. Not only was it obvious that she was not under conviction of sin; but she had little real understanding of the gospel. Through our conversations, she came to see her sin and real conviction made her life miserable. One morning she called and said, "I've finally come to Jesus. Now I understand what you've been talking about."

It is my hope that this article will help you in these areas. To do a thorough analysis of the system and its history is far beyond the scope of this undertaking. But perhaps as we examine this issue, we can see the dangers inherent in this system and chart a course for a better way.

As we begin, one thing must be made thoroughly clear. I am not advocating that we not invite people to come to Christ. The invitation to come to Christ is one that we are called to make. Should we shrink back from such a call, we would be rightly accused of being "ashamed of the gospel of Christ." Thus we should do everything possible to be more proficient in extending God's great invitation to come to Christ.

Furthermore, what is Jesus calling these to? Is it merely to make a "one time" decision about Him, or to follow Him all their lives? The invitation system gives the impression that the former is Jesus' intent. And what about "confessing Him before men"? Is Jesus saying that by a single act of confession one becomes a believer? Or is He teaching that one mark of true faith is a life that continually confesses Him? Again, the invitation system leads many to trust their eternal destination to confidence in a "confession," though they openly live in rebellion to Him throughout their lives.

In summary, many passages show that Jesus and the apostles called men to repentance and faith. But no passage indicates that either used any form of "invitation system" in bringing them to faith or in confirming their faith.⁵

2) The danger of eliciting an emotional response based upon the personality of the speaker or the persuasion of the appeal

In Mark 4, Jesus portrays four types of hearers of God's Word by using the parable of the soils. In the second soil, Jesus describes those who, "when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness." But, Jesus cautions, "they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time." Jesus knew the reality of being heard by crowds who had no desire to truly follow Him.

While this psychological element ought to be reason for concern and caution in using the invitation system, proponents actually argue that this element is all the more reason to extend an appeal for a public decision. Billy Graham teaches that the pressure brought upon the human soul is so great that an emotional outlet must be given. He argues:

Evangelist George Sweazey agrees: "To stir people religiously without giving them anything they can do about it leaves them far worse off than they were before."⁷

In reality, most psychologists would agree with Graham's assessment of the psychological pressure of the appeal, but would conclude that the response to his call is largely the result of this psychological pressure. One psychologist, George Target, gives such an assessment:

In his book, Preaching and Preachers. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones cites an example in which the invitation appeal given by an evangelist was, by program necessity, separated from the message by a half-hour of hymn singing. In explanation of the disappointingly small response to his appeal, the evangelist stated that the effect of his appeal was diminished by the half-hour of hymn singing. Lloyd-Jones observes that the evangelist's "admitting that half an hour of hymn singing can do away with the effect of a sermon... is a striking illustration of the fact that direct pressure on the will can produce 'results.'"⁹

Lewis Sperry Chafer, a well-known evangelist and one of the founders of Dallas Theological Seminary, used the invitation system until he saw the inherent dangers:

To make matters worse, many go away from the "altar," told that they are now Christians, knowing that they are not changed one bit. As a result, their unbelief may harden into skepticism toward anything Christian. R. L. Dabney notes:

They feel that a cruel trick has been played upon their inexperience by the ministers and friends of Christianity in thus thrusting them, in the hour of their confusion, into false positions.... How natural to conclude that those [experiences of conversion] of all others are delusions also? They say: "The only difference between myself and these earnest Christians is that they have not yet detected the cheat as I have."¹¹ The extension of an appeal for public decision may result in a purely psychological response that provides a catharsis for the emotional pressure of the sermon. Such persons falsely assume that their action has made them right with God. In others, it may drive them further into skepticism and doubt about the reality of the conversion of anyone. Such dangers ought to alarm every person sincerely concerned about the salvation of lost souls.

Here we have one of the greatest dangers of the invitation system. Even those employing it go to great pains to make clear that "going down the aisle" does not save anyone. We are saved by faith in Christ alone, they contend. Billy Graham, for example, says:

But examination of the invitation used by Graham shows just how confusing the system is. Keep in mind that Graham has already noted that the coming forward is a "testimony of an inward experience that you have had with Christ." When is the person converted? Why are they coming?

At the "altar," the confusion continues as he addresses those who have come: "You have come tonight to Jesus Christ, you have come to receive Him into your heart. ..." Which is it? Have they already come to Jesus, or are they coming now to receive Him? Graham continues: "He receives you; He died for you; He says, 'Thy sins are forgiven.' You accept that. The past is forgiven, God forgets.... He cannot even see your sins."¹⁴ Then he leads them to repeat a prayer known as "the sinner's prayer." The question again is obvious: have they been forgiven, or will they be when they pray the prayer?

To make matters worse, many often add so many things to the invitation that one cannot be certain what he is being asked to do. This was especially true in the invitations of Billy Sunday who often exhorted people to "Come on down and take my hand against booze, for Jesus Christ, for your flag."¹⁵

Even Spurgeon warned about the potential for confusing any system¹⁶ with salvation:

Who can observe the invitation system today and not see that many are in danger of confusing this practice with coming to faith in Christ?

In fact, Leighton Ford argues:

In other words, the giving of an invitation ought to result in an even higher percentage of "converts" living out their profession. Yet the very opposite seems to be true.

While pastoring in New England, our church participated in two Graham crusades. We received the names of 10 converts from one crusade and six from the other. In our follow up, not one was interested in church, the Bible, or even talking about their "new-found faith in Christ." Other pastors reported the same results.

Ernest Reisinger notes: "This unbiblical system has produced the greatest record of statistics ever compiled by church or business."²⁰ But such an observation is not new to our times. A century ago, Dabney observed, "The thing is so well-known that in many regions the public coolly expect about forty-five out of fifty, or even a higher ratio, to apostatize ultimately."²¹

Such was not the common experience before the use of the invitation system. Those who were converted were so thoroughly changed that there was no need of a system to encourage decisions or record them before there was fruit. False conversions were the exception rather than the rule in the ministry of Finney's contemporary, Asahel Nettleton. For example, of the 84 converts in an 1818 revival in Rocky Hill, Conn., all 84 had remained faithful according to their pastor's report 26 years later! Similarly, only three spurious conversions out of 82 professions were noted in a similar pastor's report on a revival in Ashford, Conn.²²

Toward the end of his life, Charles Finney, after reflecting on the many who claimed conversion but had since fallen away, had mixed thoughts about the genuineness of his work. In fact, his development of a doctrine of perfectionism ("entire sanctification" was the term preferred by Finney) came out of his attempt to answer the question as to why so many of his "converts" lived such godless lives. The use of an invitation system eventually leads to a two-tiered approach to the Christian life to explain the difference between those few who have been changed by their "decision" and the multitudes who have not.²³

5) The danger of giving assurance to those who are unconverted

This is perhaps the greatest alarm for those who sincerely desire to see men enter the Kingdom of Heaven. If our use of such a system leads some to believe that their decision "settles things with God" for all eternity, then we may be responsible for many of those in Matthew 7 who hear the words of our Lord saying, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" It is vital that we share the good news, but it behooves us equally to be certain that we not give assurance to those who show no evidence of conversion.

That is exactly what the invitation system does. It encourages people to make a response that "settles things" and, through subsequent counseling, to never doubt that decision. Anyone who is involved in personal evangelism can share countless examples of persons who, though presently living in gross sin, will nonetheless tell the evangelist that they are fine because they "made a decision for Christ" a certain number of years ago. They have never had any change in their life; they have no interest in church, the Bible, or even God. But they have made their "decision." Can we not see how dangerous such a system is to the souls of men?

Two centuries ago, evangelist George Whitefield warned about this danger:

Likewise Spurgeon warned:

In The Soul Winner. Spurgeon cautions against using pressure to secure quick decisions:

It very often happens that the converts that are born in excitement die when the excitement is over.... Some of the most glaring sinners known to me were once members of a church; and were, as I believe, led to make a profession by undue pressure, well-meant but ill-judged.²⁶

For years, we have heard about the values of the invitation system. It is even widely intimated

(often plainly stated) that one who failed to give public invitations could not be concerned for the souls of men. Yet could it be that the very opposite is true: that the very extension of such an appeal might be the means for deluding many into a false state of assurance ultimately resulting in their damnation?

But some will ask, "What other way is there to bring people to Christ?" I would respond: "The way that was used by Jesus and the apostles, the Reformers, the Puritans, and most others until the 1830s." That way is simply to proclaim the truth, to call men to repent and believe, and to leave the results in the hands of the Spirit who alone can bring people to faith (cf. John 3; 6:44, 65; etc.).

To explain a little more fully, let me give you two "musts" for those who would be evangelistic apart from using the invitation system.

Paul said: "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes" (Rom. 1:16). In I Corinthians 1:18, he contended: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." Peter was likewise convinced that the Word of God has power to convert. He reminded believers that they had been "born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever" (1 Peter 1:23).

To be evangelistic, we must be convinced of the power that God's Word has in converting men without the help of our man-made systems. Remember the evangelist whose appeal was separated from his message by a half-hour of hymn singing? It is obvious that he was not convinced of the power of God's Word apart from the addition of his appeal. We must be, or we will be tempted to add things to the preaching of the Word to secure greater commitments.

Those who ministered before the development of the invitation system saw the awesome power of the Word to work in men's hearts. David Brainerd testifies to the:

preaching God made use offer the awakening of sinners, and the propagation of this "work of grace among the Indians." ... There was then the greatest appearance of divine power, in awakening numbers of secure souls, promoting convictions begun, and comforting the distressed." ²⁷

Accounts from the ministry of Nettleton show the deep and penetrating work of the Word of God on hearers:

Such occurrences while ministering in the power of God's Word were not uncommon. In letters to his friend. Philander Parmele, Nettleton described many similar conversions. After a meeting in New Haven, Nettleton wrote:

Such was often the nature of conversion in the days before the invitation system when the Word was boldly preached and left to do its work in souls. Many modern examples of conversions could also be given, such as that of C. S. Lewis, who, after being confronted with the truth, struggled with it until one day he was strangely converted riding in his sidecar.

The real question is: How powerful is the Word of God? Can it change men from sinners into saints without an extension of an altar call? Will it convict and convert (as God promises),or will we need to add something that helps men "settle it"? You will never be able to do without the invitation system until you are thoroughly convinced of the power of God's Word.

2) We must urgently appeal to all men to come to Christ now

After reading this far, one may be tempted to avoid giving any appeal for people to come to Christ. Please do not misunderstand: we are under divine command to call "all people everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). Erroll Hulse reminds us: "The preacher is free to exhort and command, to plead and implore, to reason and invite. He is an ambassador who speaks on behalf of the great King and whose purpose is to bring about reconciliation."³⁰

Allow me to note a few particulars about this responsibility.

In one of his sermons, Spurgeon reminded his congregation about the doctrine of God's electing some from the foundation of the world. But he noted that our task is to "preach the gospel to every creature," not to find the elect. Spurgeon said that if God had painted a yellow stripe down the back of each of the elect, he would run up and down the streets of London, lifting up shirttails, and preaching the gospel to the elect. But, Spurgeon reminds us, God has not done so. Instead He has commanded us to "preach the gospel to every creature." We must urgently appeal to everyone to come to Christ.

John Kennedy, a nineteenth-century British minister, provides some additional instruction concerning counseling inquirers. Notice that he puts the focus of counseling inquirers on the object of their faith:

We must be patient to allow the Holy Spirit to work conviction in the heart. That may happen in a few moments, a few hours, days, or even years. But we must remain imperative in our appeal. Our message and our urgency must not change - people must repent and believe today.

An examination of the invitation system is not an easy one. It is an emotional one. "To reduce sense of shock that some may feel, I would remind them that for well over 1800 years the Holy Spirit completed successfully all His work of saving sinners without this method. It was only with the advent of Charles Finney (1792-1875) that the 'appeal' as an organized method really got under way."³² Even then, it met with much resistance until near the end of the nineteenth century. Today it is accepted as if it was used by Jesus and Paul. Be warned - many will consider you non-evangelistic if you even question the validity of this system, much less consider no longer using it as a method to bring people to Christ.³³

But we must be honest about the dangers that we have examined in this article. Is it not clear that the Scriptures "provide an invitation to sinners which is perfect and does not need addition?'"³⁴ Are you concerned about asking people to do something for salvation that was never promoted in the Bible or in early church history?

Do you wish to eliminate possibilities that persons might respond to an emotional appeal or your persuasion rather than to the gospel? Do you wish to reduce the confusion that many have in equating "coming forward" with being saved?

Are you tired of seeing great numbers coming forward only to discredit the name of Christ by professing something that has no reality in their lives? Are you really concerned to see people converted - truly converted - instead of falsely assured? Then please examine this system carefully and honestly.

On the other hand, we must not confuse the invitation system with inviting people to Christ. This we must do with all urgency. "The Great Invitation of the gospel is an awesome and glorious subject. While we are in this world we should never cease making ourselves more proficient and winsome in the employment of invitations."³⁵

Still, the dangers of this system are serious. The souls of men are at stake. To be biblically evangelistic, we must be certain that what we do leads men to faith, not just to decisions.