Open the
Bible Question Form to send your own question.
The other day a Baptist,
King James Bible, evangelist sent me an email version of an
article I assume he had written asking the question, "Can a
Man be Saved by a Tract Alone?" Admittedly, the title got my
attention and so I read the article to see where he was
coming from. The article made some good and important points
about the limitations of tracts. The small size of most
tracts do not have room to adequately deal with the issues
of salvation. God chose to use the human element of
preaching to reach the lost (1Corinthians 1:21; Romans
10:13-15). The author leans heavily on the salvation of the
Ethiopian eunuch who replied when Philip asked if he
understood what he was reading, "How can I, except some man
should guide me?" (Acts 8:31).
The author concludes that
although God can "use a tract to plant and water," a "human
instrument must cross an individual's path for the man to be
saved." In his illustration concerning the Ethiopian eunuch,
he admits that the "eunuch was reading from Isaiah 53, the
best tract a man could have (the Word of God)" but that he
still required a human visitation from Philip in order to be
saved. This he then applies to all who get saved. They must
have a human instrument in order to be saved. To his credit,
the author of the article does admit that the witness does
not have to be present when the lost person gets saved and
that the human instrumentation may come by preaching from
the pulpit. Evidently, it is only necessary that a human be
present at some time as a witness to the lost man or woman.
He closes his article with a warning to those who reject
this clear teaching from the word of God. They may be of the
false prophets Jesus told about in Matthew 7:22-23.
Well, at the risk of being
labeled a false prophet, I would like to give some
constructive criticism of this article. I believe that this
author truly loves the Lord and believes the Book (which is
why I left his name out of my article) and he certainly
makes some good points, but I see some serious problems with
this teaching. First of all, I accept the Bible teaching
that God chose to use preaching to save the lost and that
the Ethiopian eunuch did not know how to come to God without
the help of another man. But this does not prove that a man
cannot in any circumstances be saved without a human witness
present at some time. The author is using God's natural
pattern in order to prove that the same God will allow no
exceptions to the rule. But throughout the Bible, I see a
God who continually does what man says He cannot. Just about
the time we think we really have God pegged, He throws a
curve ball that we cannot hit.
This error becomes more
serious when it calls the word of God a tract and claims
that no one can get saved by reading the Bible unless a man
showed him the way. Even "the engrafted word, which is able
to save your souls" (James 1:21) is not able to save without
a man standing by to explain what it means. I am not denying
that this is God's normal pattern, but that is a far
distance from saying that salvation can come in no other
way. I suppose whenever we hear someone give a testimony
that they were saved by a tract or by reading the Bible that
we are to curtly tell them that they are lost. Perhaps this
is a new way to get more converts in a meeting. I do not
know.
Finally, this teaching
creates serious problems in defining the human instruments.
The author of this article has already stated that the
witness does not have to carry on a personal conversation
with the lost person. It can be preaching "from the pulpit
in a public assembly." But if this works, what about a
message on the radio or a taped video message? It would
still be through human instrumentality--only the human
instrument would not be physically present. Are we going to
superstitiously count on a physical presence for salvation?
Then again, what if the sermon were to be written out and
printed in a book? Would this be human instrument enough?
Many claimed to have been saved from the printed sermons of
Charles Spurgeon. Were all of these people lost because
Spurgeon was not in the room with them? This brings us back
to a tract. How can we say there is no human instrumentation
involved in tracts? Someone had to write it; someone had to
print it; someone had to distribute it. Human instruments
are all over the distribution of tracts.
As I said before, there
valid criticisms of modern-day tracts. In olden days, a
tract was a small book or booklet with much more material
than can be put in our tiny tracts. Our modern tracts are
too small to give much in depth about salvation unless one
already has the knowledge of the way of salvation. I would
also agree with this author what much harm has probably been
done by the set prayers found at the end of many tracts. I
believe that it makes people think that salvation is the
saying of a repetitive prayer. But are there not many
soul-winners who personally lead others to Christ this way?
It is not the presence of a tract without a human that is
the problem. In the end, my problem with this article is
that it tries to solve some real problems with tracts by
creating a new doctrine about salvation. I may be looked on
as a false teacher for my criticism, but I know that this is
serious business indeed. We need to be most wary in telling
God what He must do in order to save a man.