1. In my humiliation, I am realizing that so much of my thoughts have been thought by dead people. Except if I can do a better job of summarizing, clarifying, illustrating, relating, or applying than they did — if for nothing else than a gap in context — I would be wasting my time to put pressure on the buttons of my keyboard. Especially when I have so much more to read.

2. When I want to write, it is often in passing, and my thoughts never get all down. E.g. “What are the preconditions for a given person to be persuaded of God’s existence, and for whom/how are those conditions met?” and “What roles do culture, societal institutions (marriage, courts, universities, etc.), and vocabulary (e.g. “creature,” “excruciating,” “Adam and Eve”, etc.) have in proclaiming, explicating, illustrating and defending Special Revelation?”

3. I’ve been busy spending my intellectual juices reading theological studies and researching for IT problems at work. Hard to have the intellectual fervor, initiative and drive (let alone time!) to sit down and write. In other words, I just don’t feel like it.

But for you, please meditate on Romans 1:16-32. What about God has been revealed, and how? There’s at least two different distinct revelations of God. What is the relationship between sin and the knowledge of God? Are people cut off from the knowledge of God? Jesus Christ said, “Eternal life is this: that they know you, the True God, and Jesus, whom He has sent.” With what is Eternal life and knowledge contrasted in Romans 1?

Nope, it’s not in the Scripture as presented, nor is the preamble in the Bible. By preamble (or what comes after it), I mean that when someone presents the sinner’s prayer, they essentially say “hey, if you say these words and mean it, then you’re saved”… That’s not right. There’s something distinctly wrong with it. It is, perhaps, the main issue I have with it. But there are other things of note.

For one, it places man at the center of it: if you do X (and Y), then you get Z! … But Y can always be questioned (did I really mean it? what if I wasn’t genuine? I understand the gospel so much more now, did I really even get it enough at the time for it to count?)

Likewise, God initiates and follows through with salvation. It isn’t ultimately all in your court. God never made the existential ultimatum so cut and dry and inorganic. It isn’t like God says, “It’s totally up to you: the ball’s in your court whether you’re saved or not.” God interacts with us and woo’s us. He changes our hearts according to his purpose. That said, our heart, soul, mind, and strength are all being brought in to God– our speech isn’t the first step in our relationship with God; it is God. He doesn’t start by giving us a vocabulary, but rather a heartbeat.

Second, historically, a person wanting to become a Christian would come to his elder/bishop/whatever and give a credible profession of faith; not just with word, but showing repentance in their life. Only then would they be encouraged to get baptized (and then partake in communion!). But they had no right to be called a Christian until they were examined — and not just by what they said.

Now, it is important to remember that whether someone is saved or not is not determined (in the sense of decision) by the elder, but by God. Instead, it was determined (in the sense of investigated) by the elder for the practicality of membership/entering into the community.

This means, that while someone may be saved after saying that prayer, it is not as if the prayer were the cause, but (perhaps more importantly for this discussion) the elder/whoever-is-presenting-it does *not* have the authority or justification to tell someone that the person is saved on that sole basis.