There are two ways a Gospel minister can conduct an invitation for the sinner to trust Christ. He can either imbed his invitation into the body of his Gospel sermon (which is how Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, George Whitefield, Asahel Nettleton, and Charles Spurgeon did it), or he can tack it on at the end (which is how Billy Graham and John R. Rice did it). This ministerial musing has nothing to do with where in the Gospel sermon the invitation to trust Christ is found.
Feel free to preach the Gospel and invite sinners to trust Christ. Never hesitate to engage in that high and holy calling. As you do that, however, recognise that among those who actually preach the Gospel (and most don't) there are a great many whose invitations to trust Christ are diametrically opposed to the spirit of the Gospel they purport to preach.
Who initiated God's interaction with Adam? God. Who initiated God's interaction with Noah? God. Who initated God's interaction with Abram? God. Who initiated God's interaction with Isaac? God. Who initiated God's interaction with Jacob/Israel? God.
Whose idea was it to send God's Son to seek and to save sinners? God. Whose idea was it to bring the Church into existence to carry out the Great Commission of the Lord Jesus Christ? Would you like to answer that it was the Lord Jesus Christ? Great. Would you like to point out that the phrase "church of God" is found eight times in the New Testament, suggesting that it was God's idea? Also great. The point that I seek to make is that there is nothing about the church or the church's mission that would suggest any initiating activity with respect to the salvation of the lost is to be found in the thoughts or conduct of anyone who is lost.
From Pentecost when the church was empowered onward the initiative is always found with the Spirit-empowered and Spirit-led Christians in the Biblical record. There is not a single instance in the New Testament of the initiative in a conversion transaction by an unsaved person. On the contrary, it is always God, the Spirit of God, the glorified Son of God, or the empowered child of God who initiates the conversion transaction.
And how about the comments made by the Savior? Did He not claim that He came to seek and to save that which was lost? Of course, He did.
That being true, why are Gospel ministers and well-intentioned Christians so determined to reverse the dynamic the Bible so convincingly and unerringly pictures without fail? This is done when the sinner is told, taught, encouraged, exhorted, and otherwise misled to "invite Jesus into your life." What! From where comes this notion that the sinner is responsible to invite the Savior?
Such an approach to evangelism suggests by action if not openly declaring by instruction that the Lord of glory is waiting for the sinner's word, the sinner's permission, the sinner's go-ahead before He dares to make a move. Such suggests the Savior is passive when the Bible shows Him to always and only be the instigator of the sinner's salvation.
Just as I have no desire to engage anyone in an argument about when to invite sinner's to Christ, be it during or after a Gospel sermon, so also do I have no desire to engage in soteriological wranglings. I only seek to point out to men who are convinced the Gospel and its presentation are so clearly shown in Scripture that at no time should a sinner be led to conclude that he is the active party and the Savior is the passive party.
Quite the other way around, John 1.12 shows the sinner to passively receive Christ. Matthew 11.28 shows the sinner to be responsive to Christ's command to come to Him. I leave it to you to search the New Testament for verification and validation of what I bring to your attention. It is a violation of New Testament pattern and protocol to teach a sinner, to suggest to a sinner, to encourage a sinner, and (if I may be so bold) to allow a sinner to invite Christ into his life.
No, sir! To be saved you are to respond to Christ. You are not to initiate anything with Him. Those who are dead in trespasses and sins are incapable of initiating anything with Him. He left heaven's glory, was born of a virgin, died a substitutionary death on the cross, rose from the dead, ascended to glory, and saves to the uttermost those who come to God by Him ... doing so by responding, reacting, repenting, and believing in response to Him (and those who represent Him) via the Gospel.
Only when this dynamic is appreciated and honored by the Gospel minister or the witnessing Christian is Jonah's declaration reflected: "Salvation is of the LORD." Am I suggesting that those who invite Jesus into their lives are not saved? No, I am not.
I am suggesting that Gospel ministers and witnessing Christians conscientiously emulate and imitate as much as humanly possible the approach used to bring people to Christ found in the New Testament. It is better to urge the sinner to receive Christ, to believe in Christ, to believe on Christ, or to trust Christ than it is to suggest the sinner invite Jesus into his life. Why so? The Scriptural approach more implicitly acknowledges Christ as the initiatior and the instigator than does inviting Him into your life.
The travesty invitation seems to invite Christ to do something He already purposed to do, came to do, and has declared He does. The proper invitation is an invitation to the sinner to respond to Christ, rather than the sinner inviting Christ to do something.
