Inviting Jesus into your heart

[PRmerger]

I have to start working, but, are you asking me for a Catholic teaching, or an Evangelical teaching?

Catholic.

magical incantation, but as a way to guide people to “invite Jesus into their heart” and begin a relationship as a child of God–is perfectly in line with Catholic teaching?

No. Not perfectly.

But it is also not found in the Bible, this “Sinner’s Prayer”.

And for you to declare that I have said it is “heretical” is a straw man of the greatest magnitude.

 

[RedSoxWife]

Now, the way I have been given to understand justification by faith was a free gift given by God through his grace.

But the way I hear some people talk about the “sinners’ prayer” it sounds like the easiest day of works salvation I’ve ever heard. That you the sinner invite Jesus into your heart and are then “saved” by this initiative action. This is certainly not the doctrine of the Westminster Confession, the Augsberg Confessions, or the Church of England’s Thirty Nine Articles and corresponding homily on the salvation of mankind. And doesn’t seem to me to be the doctrine of St Paul or S Augustine.

So where does it come from? Am I right in the way I have interpreted it? Is this a phenomenon only of the non-denominational denominations?

I was raised Southern Baptist and that’s absolutely what we were taught. If you said the words you were saved and that was that. The justification usually given was usually Romans 10:10 (we’ll use a protestant translation so it works):

“With your heart you believe and are made right with God. With your mouth you say that Jesus is Lord. And so you are saved.”

Of course all the other verses that contradict this made me very uncomfortable… even as an eight year old (I wrote about it a bit here). Matthew 7 seemed to directly contradict the way we read that particular verse in Romans and that made me very, very nervous…

 

[ltwin]

I was raised Southern Baptist and that’s absolutely what we were taught. If you said the words you were saved and that was that. The justification usually given was usually Romans 10:10 (we’ll use a protestant translation so it works):

Of course all the other verses that contradict this made me very uncomfortable… even as an eight year old (I wrote about it a bit here). Matthew 7 seemed to directly contradict the way we read that particular verse in Romans and that made me very, very nervous…

It seems this is a common story among Southern Baptists. At the Convention level, they have made statements to clarify that it is not as simple as saying the words in recent years. Whether this filters down to the local congregations is another story entirely.

 

[andrewstx]

I took Indifferently’s question to be a request for specific information—how did the “sinner’s prayer” originate, and was he understanding it correctly—rather than just a request for a Catholic opinion.

I read here to learn new things. I already know that Catholics consider much of what Protestants do— particularly what Evangelicals do—to be wrong. I’ve heard it a million times. It’s discouraging when I click on a thread hoping to learn something or to contribute information, and find the second post has already gone right to the “EVANGELICALS ARE WRONG” stamp without addressing the thread question in a detailed, informative way. I tend to yawn myself and move on to a thread where I can learn something I don’t already know.

I do not consider Evangelicals to be wrong at all, but sometimes I wonder if they go far enough in their theology. Yes every Christian absolutely requires faith and repentence, but sadly they stop right there and discount or even at times deny the efficacy of baptism and the other sacraments. They say “just get saved” and stop right there.

There are several verses in Scripture that flat out say that baptism forgives sin and is not something you can do after your sins are already forgiven by “gettin’ saved”. I don’t think that is faithful to the Scriptures, but is faithful to a previously decided upon theology “sola fide”.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I do not consider Evangelicals to be wrong at all, but sometimes I wonder if they go far enough in their theology. Yes every Christian absolutely requires faith and repentence, but sadly they stop right there and discount or even at times deny the efficacy of baptism and the other sacraments. They say “just get saved” and stop right there.

There are several verses in Scripture that flat out say that baptism forgives sin and is not something you can do after your sins are already forgiven by “gettin’ saved”. I don’t think that is faithful to the Scriptures, but is faithful to a previously decided upon theology “sola fide”.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Catholic.

No. Not perfectly.

But it is also not found in the Bible, this “Sinner’s Prayer”.

And for you to declare that I have said it is “heretical” is a straw man of the greatest magnitude.

PRm—

1. I’m not Catholic, so I’m not going to give a Catholic teaching that the “sinner’s prayer” is contrary to. Speaking as an Evangelical Christian, I’m not saying that the “sinner’s prayer” is wrong, so why would I try to prove something I don’t believe to be true? I am also not saying that I know, from a Catholic perspective, that the “sinner’s prayer” is wrong—whether it is wrong or not according to Catholics was something I was hoping to learn on this thread. To come to a point where that could be discussed, though, we’d first have to see that both Catholics and Evangelicals understood the various uses of the “sinner’s prayer” in contrast to the misuses of it.
2. Did anyone say that the “sinner’s prayer” was to be found all in one place in the Bible?
3. Maybe we are indeed defining “heretical” differently. I know, to a Catholic, a heretic is this (from Merriam Webster’s dictionary): “a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially: a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed belief”. And so, I know it’s incorrect for a Catholic to call a modern Protestant a heretic, since many of us were never baptized as Catholics.

For “heretical”, the same dictionary says this: " characterized by a departure from accepted beliefs or standards: unorthodox". Well, it still seems to me that in your first few posts you were distinctly implying that the “sinner’s prayer” came about because of what you consider a departure from accepted beliefs about the meaning of the Bible and who may interpret it. While I would mind being called a heretic by a Catholic, it doesn’t bother me if a Catholic were to say that my beliefs are heretical. I understand that to a Catholic, that’s just a statement of fact according to what they believe.

PRm, I’m tired, I’ve had a very long day and expect more of the same tomorrow, and I’m not looking for a debate. I’m just looking for information. In a earlier post you used the word “refute”, and here you used the word “straw man”. Both those terms make me wonder if you see this discussion as some sort of debate. I’m not interested in arguments or debates; I’m just looking for information, given by knowledgeable people of various religious beliefs in a friendly but dispassionate manner–Catholic answers, not Catholic arguments. I got into this particular discussion with you as a means to give feedback on what I’ve found to be helpful and what I’ve found to be a hindrance towards that end. I apologize if any of this seems like a personal criticism of you. It’s not meant that way.

 

[PRmerger]

PRm—

1. I’m not Catholic, so I’m not going to give a Catholic teaching that the “sinner’s prayer” is contrary to.

Then you ought not be saying that I have proclaimed it to be heretical.

If you can’t even articulate a Catholic teaching that the sinner’s prayer is contrary to, then it’s curious that you think I have made some sort of pronouncement that it is heresy.

What I have said is that it is a practice borne out of reading the Bible outside of the lens of the Church which gave us this Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

1. Did anyone say that the “sinner’s prayer” was to be found all in one place in the Bible?

Then if it is not your paradigm that all religious beliefs and practices must be found in the Bible, then I hope you allow Catholics this same paradigm, and that you have no objections to our beliefs and practices that ostensibly cannot be found in the Bible.

1. Maybe we are indeed defining “heretical” differently. I know, to a Catholic, a heretic is this (from Merriam Webster’s dictionary): “a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially: a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed belief”. And so, I know it’s incorrect for a Catholic to call a modern Protestant a heretic, since many of us were never baptized as Catholics.

You are correct.

For “heretical”, the same dictionary says this: " characterized by a departure from accepted beliefs or standards: unorthodox". Well, it still seems to me that in your first few posts you were distinctly implying that the “sinner’s prayer” came about because of what you consider a departure from accepted beliefs about the meaning of the Bible and who may interpret it.

That is not the Catholic understanding of 'heretical".

While I would mind being called a heretic by a Catholic, it doesn’t bother me if a Catholic were to say that my beliefs are heretical. I understand that to a Catholic, that’s just a statement of fact according to what they believe.

Fair enough.

PRm, I’m tired, I’ve had a very long day and expect more of the same tomorrow, and I’m not looking for a debate. I’m just looking for information. In a earlier post you used the word “refute”, and here you used the word “straw man”. Both those terms make me wonder if you see this discussion as some sort of debate.

I am angry that you have misrepresented my comments. By a mile. You weren’t even close.

As such, I am looking for an explanation from you as to where you believe it was that I declared that the practice of saying the sinner’s prayer was heretical.

It appears that you have “jumped the gun”.

Ironic, isn’t it, given the objection you had to my posting initially?

 

[Jon_S_1]

PRm—

1. I’m not Catholic, so I’m not going to give a Catholic teaching that the “sinner’s prayer” is contrary to. Speaking as an Evangelical Christian, I’m not saying that the “sinner’s prayer” is wrong, so why would I try to prove something I don’t believe to be true? I am also not saying that I know, from a Catholic perspective, that the “sinner’s prayer” is wrong—whether it is wrong or not according to Catholics was something I was hoping to learn on this thread. To come to a point where that could be discussed, though, we’d first have to see that both Catholics and Evangelicals understood the various uses of the “sinner’s prayer” in contrast to the misuses of it.
2. Did anyone say that the “sinner’s prayer” was to be found all in one place in the Bible?
3. Maybe we are indeed defining “heretical” differently. I know, to a Catholic, a heretic is this (from Merriam Webster’s dictionary): “a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially: a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed belief”. And so, I know it’s incorrect for a Catholic to call a modern Protestant a heretic, since many of us were never baptized as Catholics.

For “heretical”, the same dictionary says this: " characterized by a departure from accepted beliefs or standards: unorthodox". Well, it still seems to me that in your first few posts you were distinctly implying that the “sinner’s prayer” came about because of what you consider a departure from accepted beliefs about the meaning of the Bible and who may interpret it. While I would mind being called a heretic by a Catholic, it doesn’t bother me if a Catholic were to say that my beliefs are heretical. I understand that to a Catholic, that’s just a statement of fact according to what they believe.

PRm, I’m tired, I’ve had a very long day and expect more of the same tomorrow, and I’m not looking for a debate. I’m just looking for information. In a earlier post you used the word “refute”, and here you used the word “straw man”. Both those terms make me wonder if you see this discussion as some sort of debate. I’m not interested in arguments or debates; I’m just looking for information, given by knowledgeable people of various religious beliefs in a friendly but dispassionate manner–Catholic answers, not Catholic arguments. I got into this particular discussion with you as a means to give feedback on what I’ve found to be helpful and what I’ve found to be a hindrance towards that end. I apologize if any of this seems like a personal criticism of you. It’s not meant that way.

Back to the original topic. I would have to say that I don’t see anything heretical in the sinners prayer. It is a valid sound prayer. I think what could be considered heretical is the teaching surrounding the prayer. The teaching that this is what you need to say “to get out of hell free” in particular would be heretical to a catholic. Even I think the idea that this prayer somehow makes you a Christian could be heretical teaching as the Catholic Church believes that one must be baptized to become a Christian. I think we would acknowledge together that the prayer is a good way to open the door to faith. Catholics would counsel people making the altar call to go to the local parish and enroll in RCIA and get baptized. Many protestants would counsel them to go join a Church to learn the Bible, but would probably consider them saved/Christians already.

I know Billy Graham often had Catholic Priests/Lay People assist at his altar calls. I am not sure if they gave specifically catholic counsel to who they encountered or merely guided them to dig deeper, but like I said if its seen as opening the door to the Christian life, then we can all live with that.

 

[PRmerger]

I think we would acknowledge together that the prayer is a good way to open the door to faith. Catholics would counsel people making the altar call to go to the local parish and enroll in RCIA and get baptized.

 

[AbideWithMe]

It comes from reading the Scriptures outside of the lens of the Church which gave us these Scriptures.

All manner of innovative practices have developed over the years, once people divorced themselves from the idea that it is the Catholic Church which guides us into all Truth.

At any rate, do you have a response?

The practice of inviting Jesus into one’s heart and thereby achieving one’s salvation is an innovation that is borne out of reading the Bible without the guidance of the guardian of Truth: the Catholic Church.

I am angry that you have misrepresented my comments. By a mile. You weren’t even close.

As such, I am looking for an explanation from you as to where you believe it was that I declared that the practice of saying the sinner’s prayer was heretical.

It appears that you have “jumped the gun”.

Ironic, isn’t it, given the objection you had to my posting initially?

PRm, I’ve really tried to get some clarity between us, but I’m just about ready to give up. Apparently we are talking past each other, neither one of us hearing what the other is saying.

I didn’t say you declared the sinner’s prayer heretical, I said your comments seemed to imply it. You don’t believe the sinner’s prayer is perfectly in line with Catholic teaching; so then to a Catholic it’s a departure, a deviation, from the Truth, whether by 10 degrees off straightness or 180 degrees; that departure can reasonably be called heretical by the definition I gave. You said that wasn’t the Catholic definition. Okay, but can you see that I was using a valid definition?

 

[PRmerger]

I didn’t say you declared the sinner’s prayer heretical, I said your comments seemed to imply it.

Nope.

If I said, “Your comment here seems to imply that you believe Catholics are incapable of having conversion experiences” what would you say? Even if I qualified that with, “I didn’t say that you declared Catholics incapable of having conversion experiences only that you seemed to imply it.”

Your response would be?

Well said.

As an Evangelical Christian, I’ve done all the things a good “sinner’s prayer” would lead a person to do, but I’ve never said a “sinner’s prayer”, though I did have an intense conversion experience which I remember to this day, more than thirty years later.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Back to the original topic. I would have to say that I don’t see anything heretical in the sinners prayer. It is a valid sound prayer. I think what could be considered heretical is the teaching surrounding the prayer. The teaching that this is what you need to say “to get out of hell free” in particular would be heretical to a catholic. Even I think the idea that this prayer somehow makes you a Christian could be heretical teaching as the Catholic Church believes that one must be baptized to become a Christian. I think we would acknowledge together that the prayer is a good way to open the door to faith. Catholics would counsel people making the altar call to go to the local parish and enroll in RCIA and get baptized. Many protestants would counsel them to go join a Church to learn the Bible, but would probably consider them saved/Christians already.

I know Billy Graham often had Catholic Priests/Lay People assist at his altar calls. I am not sure if they gave specifically catholic counsel to who they encountered or merely guided them to dig deeper, but like I said if its seen as opening the door to the Christian life, then we can all live with that.

Well said, Jon. Please, everyone, note, though, that the idea that saying the sinner’s prayer as some magical incantation is also heretical to the major group of churches, the SBC, that uses the sinner’s prayer, and they’ve made an effort to make that clear.

PRm–I do think (I don’t know, as Jon noted, that Catholics probably do have to consider the sinner’s prayer somewhat heretical, because as Evangelicals, we believe a person becomes a Christian right at that moment of repentance, trust, and expression of desire to give oneself to Christ, while I believe Catholic teaching is a person wouldn’t quite be a Christian till baptism.

 

[PRmerger]

PRm–I do think (I don’t know, as Jon noted, that Catholics probably do have to consider the sinner’s prayer somewhat heretical,

What was it in Jon’s post that made you think he knows that Catholics “consider the sinner’s prayer somewhat heretical”?

Because it appears that he said the exact OPPOSITE:

I would have to say that I don’t see anything heretical in the sinners prayer. It is a valid sound prayer.

 

[AbideWithMe]

What I have said is that it is a practice borne out of reading the Bible outside of the lens of the Church which gave us this Bible.

It comes from reading the Scriptures outside of the lens of the Church which gave us these Scriptures.

All manner of innovative practices have developed over the years, once people divorced themselves from the idea that it is the Catholic Church which guides us into all Truth.

At any rate, do you have a response?

The practice of inviting Jesus into one’s heart and thereby achieving one’s salvation is an innovation that is borne out of reading the Bible without the guidance of the guardian of Truth: the Catholic Church.

PRm–I’m going to bed. If you care, please compare your latter statement of what you said with your actual, fuller, statements in your first two posts. Can you see where I’d get the idea that you were implying more than what you said later? If not, then okay. I give up. Forgive me if you think it is needed.

 

[Jon_S_1]

What was it in Jon’s post that made you think he knows that Catholics “consider the sinner’s prayer somewhat heretical”?

Because it appears that he said the exact OPPOSITE:

To clarify, I see nothing heretical with these words.

“Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness. I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from my sins and invite You to come into my heart and life. I want to trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior. In Your Name. Amen.”

That said, as I said before, coupling these words with their normal intention is a problem.

 

[AbideWithMe]

What was it in Jon’s post that made you think he knows that Catholics “consider the sinner’s prayer somewhat heretical”?

Because it appears that he said the exact OPPOSITE:

Even I think the idea that this prayer somehow makes you a Christian could be heretical teaching as the Catholic Church believes that one must be baptized to become a Christian. I think we would acknowledge together that the prayer is a good way to open the door to faith. Catholics would counsel people making the altar call to go to the local parish and enroll in RCIA and get baptized. Many protestants would counsel them to go join a Church to learn the Bible, but would probably consider them saved/Christians already.

 

[pwlj_christ87]

just respondingto the original post…

the sinners prayer to me relates back to scripture and Romans (correct me if im wrong) where we have to acknowledge we are sinners so that the redemptive act of jesus Christ dieing on the cross for our sins is relevant

that’s all it is to me god bless

 

[AbideWithMe]

To clarify, I see nothing heretical with these words.

“Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness. I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from my sins and invite You to come into my heart and life. I want to trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior. In Your Name. Amen.”

That said, as I said before, coupling these words with their normal intention is a problem.

Right, but the normal intention of an Evangelical–not the “magical incantation” abuse–is that the person who has thus given themselves to Christ, and reciprocally “invited Christ into their heart”, is now fully a Christian right then and there. Baptism must follow as a “necessity of precept” out if obedience, but we don’t consider that baptism a “necessity of means”, to use the terms from the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on baptism. To a Catholic, then, isn’t our practice of the sinner’s prayer heretical to a degree because of that necessity of precept/necessity of means difference?

 

[Jon_S_1]

Right, but the normal intention of an Evangelical–not the “magical incantation” abuse–is that the person who has thus given themselves to Christ, and reciprocally “invited Christ into their heart”, is now fully a Christian right then and there. Baptism must follow as a “necessity of precept” out if obedience, but we don’t consider that baptism a “necessity of means”, to use the terms from the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on baptism. To a Catholic, then isn’t our practice of the sinner’s prayer heretical to a degree?

Yep!