Altar Call

[n david]

There are many things the modern church does that isn't supported in scripture as something the early church did. If we want to nit pick every little thing, for starters, we wouldn't be meeting in a building. There wouldn't be Ushers or different parts of the service. There wouldn't be choirs or bands. There wouldn't be sound systems, instruments, lights, etc.

The only thing you would be left with is an offering and a message. That's it. And even the offering is only found in a couple verses. Mostly it was "house to house" and "breaking bread."

So let's recognize that there are a lot of things which have been added to the modern-day church and service which did not originate with the early church.

Are some things we do out of tradition? Absolutely. All of the above: buildings, set times to meet, choirs, songs, ALL of that is tradition. Does that mean it's wrong or bad? Not at all.

JMO, the altar call is important. It's a time for people to pray and respond to the Word which was delivered.

I briefly served under a Pastor who eliminated the altar call service. First service as Pastor, he opened his message by telling the church he would not have an altar call or music after the message. Instead, he would just have a prayer of dismissal and end after he was finished. His reason for eliminating it was because he didn't want people to feel uncomfortable; and altar calls would cause people to feel uncomfortable. I ended up resigning my position, not because of this issue alone, but this combined with other things.

What is the reason for giving a message? To hear your own voice? To show people how much you believe you know? What's the point of the message if not to cause a response; and how can people respond if there's no time at the end to allow for the response?

In every scripture where a disciple preached, there was a response. Sure, it wasn't called an altar call. But there was a moment afterwards where people responded to what they heard.

[larrylyates]

Originally Posted by n david

There are many things the modern church does that isn't supported in scripture as something the early church did. If we want to nit pick every little thing, for starters, we wouldn't be meeting in a building. There wouldn't be Ushers or different parts of the service. There wouldn't be choirs or bands. There wouldn't be sound systems, instruments, lights, etc.

The only thing you would be left with is an offering and a message. That's it. And even the offering is only found in a couple verses. Mostly it was "house to house" and "breaking bread."

So let's recognize that there are a lot of things which have been added to the modern-day church and service which did not originate with the early church.

Are some things we do out of tradition? Absolutely. All of the above: buildings, set times to meet, choirs, songs, ALL of that is tradition. Does that mean it's wrong or bad? Not at all.

JMO, the altar call is important. It's a time for people to pray and respond to the Word which was delivered.

I briefly served under a Pastor who eliminated the altar call service. First service as Pastor, he opened his message by telling the church he would not have an altar call or music after the message. Instead, he would just have a prayer of dismissal and end after he was finished. His reason for eliminating it was because he didn't want people to feel uncomfortable; and altar calls would cause people to feel uncomfortable. I ended up resigning my position, not because of this issue alone, but this combined with other things.

What is the reason for giving a message? To hear your own voice? To show people how much you believe you know? What's the point of the message if not to cause a response; and how can people respond if there's no time at the end to allow for the response?

In every scripture where a disciple preached, there was a response. Sure, it wasn't called an altar call. But there was a moment afterwards where people responded to what they heard.

Well put! The point of opening your mouth is to reach someone. The Altar Call serves a useful purpose. Finney's "Mourners Bench" needs to be revisited.

[MarieA27]

Originally Posted by Titus2woman

I always loved the altar service. It is in my opinion the most genuine and authentic part of Pentecostal services mostly void of the showmanship of preaching. I would love it better without the driving, repetitive music that is so prevalent in big churches and love small churches that don't have full 'bands' for that reason... Head and shoulders over hearing the choir sing although I love that too... only thing I love better might be testimony services and you just never hardly see those any more... but I could sit for hours and hear my brothers and sisters in the Lord testify about the goodness of God.

I do really miss church some days.

This is interesting. ..I guess in my church, we first have prayer and tarrying service, where some of the saints who have the Holy Ghost would tarry with the seekers, singing songs, praying and saying words of encouragement. Then we have song and testimony service. Then there is preaching, then altar call for baptism etc.

I think on this forum is the first time that I heard of the altar call being different.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by larrylyates

Well put! The point of opening your mouth is to reach someone. The Altar Call serves a useful purpose. Finney's "Mourners Bench" needs to be revisited.

I am still conflicted as to the thrust of said response. Is it to cause immediate prayer and emotional responses as we see or a change of heart and mind. From my own personal experience the latter might occur without the former.

[LifeUncommon]

Thanks for the input, everyone. I don't put much stock in the traditions of men. It's disturbing to me how much of what we know as church today is tradition.

[Esaias]

So then, considering there is no 'altar call' in the bible, where people were told to come forward and 'pray' about Jesus, pray to Him, or what not... but rather that people were told to get right with God and if asked 'what do we do' they were told to repent of their sin and false religion and get baptised in the name of the Lord...

Should we do away with the 'altar call' and instead call people to repent and be baptised?

Shouldn't the call to be baptised in the Lord's name replace the traditional 'altar call'?

Of course, I am talking about altar calls for sinners to get right with God, not a 'healing line' or something like that.

If you were a travelling evangelist, how would you handle this?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Should we do away with the 'altar call' and instead call people to repent and be baptised?

Shouldn't the call to be baptised in the Lord's name replace the traditional 'altar call'?

I would like to see more of that kind of altar call.

[jediwill83]

I think that there is a big push for emotionally demonstrative activity in altar calls.I think that there is alot of pressure to get "prayed through" that makes people feel that they have to do this or that or else they have missed something from God...and yes there is an undercurrent of "You gotta be up here where its all happening.".... personally alot of people packed close makes me nervous and its hard to concentrate....of course if your goal is eliciting a reaction rather than sincere heartfelt communication with God concentrating isntbneeded much....just react to the music and the shouting....I for one can barely concentrate to talk on the phone when someone else is talking around me much less pray with people touching me and talking in my ear.....this is just me bein real guys.