Jack Hyles

[Invicta]

John, I agree to, & I have stated before, for a person to be saved they do not have to have much head knowledge of the Bible.

They have to know that they're a lost sinner, in need of being saved, & until they know that there is no way they can be saved.

One thing about it, after they know they are a lost sinner, the penalty for being a lost sinner, they know that Jesus died on the cross to pay for their sin debt. Them its a good time to for them to say a prayer confessing their sins, confessing they are a lost sinner, & accepting Jesus as their Savior as their only hope.

When one is saved, we would expect a change in life, as in the case of Zacchaeus. One has to know the nature of God, and that one has sinned against Him. Something that is not often taught these days.

[John81]

When one is saved, we would expect a change in life, as in the case of Zacchaeus. One has to know the nature of God, and that one has sinned against Him. Something that is not often taught these days.

So very true. This is not a popular teaching so it's rarely mentioned. Today it's more common to hear it taught that one can be saved and never show any signs of salvation. That's not what Scripture teaches.

Our culture today wants to believe it can have everything and that no one, not even God, should tell them how to live. Millions want to feel they are okay with God but they don't want their lives changed.

How sad it is to hear someone confronted, in a loving way, about sin in their lives, blow up in anger declaring they are a Christian and going to heaven just the same as anyone else and it doesn't matter how they live.

[irishman]

here is list of the books Dr. Hyles wrote. They are public domain, as he did not believe in copyrighting his material. Check it out for yourselves, and don' merely pass on tat which you have heard.

In the booklet in question, on page 34, can anyone deny that he taught a clear, reliable Gospel? Can anyone deny that he made sure they understood that they were sinners in need of salvation? (previous chapter)

Take time to read, it is not a terribly long book.

By the way, there are some who have added their own "touch" to his teaching, just as many have other men of God's teachings There is even a web site by people who attended HAC, that is filled with hate and negative remarks about Dr. Hyles. Believe what you will, but remember that "what goes around, comes around.".

[dantheman2]

here is list of the books Dr. Hyles wrote. They are public domain, as he did not believe in copyrighting his material. Check it out for yourselves, and don' merely pass on tat which you have heard.

In the booklet in question, on page 34, can anyone deny that he taught a clear, reliable Gospel? Can anyone deny that he made sure they understood that they were sinners in need of salvation? (previous chapter)

Take time to read, it is not a terribly long book.

By the way, there are some who have added their own "touch" to his teaching, just as many have other men of God's teachings There is even a web site by people who attended HAC, that is filled with hate and negative remarks about Dr. Hyles. Believe what you will, but remember that "what goes around, comes around.".

I did not know this man. I never met him. I did not attend HAC. I am not a follower of his. I did read enough of the book and did see what he taught. I do deny that he taught the Gospel according to the word of God. I 100% deny that he taught the truth.

Now, I do not say that to be offensive nor am I trying to be ugly, but what I read in his own book that he taught (the example he spoke of himself) is clearly false doctrine. He clearly gave an example where all he did was trick someone into saying some little prayer. That is just not scriptural.

[dantheman2]

here is list of the books Dr. Hyles wrote. They are public domain, as he did not believe in copyrighting his material. Check it out for yourselves, and don' merely pass on tat which you have heard.

In the booklet in question, on page 34, can anyone deny that he taught a clear, reliable Gospel? Can anyone deny that he made sure they understood that they were sinners in need of salvation? (previous chapter)

Take time to read, it is not a terribly long book.

By the way, there are some who have added their own "touch" to his teaching, just as many have other men of God's teachings There is even a web site by people who attended HAC, that is filled with hate and negative remarks about Dr. Hyles. Believe what you will, but remember that "what goes around, comes around.".

Read the entire book. While his main points about going, going by twos, etc are valid and good, most of what he says under his headings are unbiblical hog wash. I stand by what I said in my previous post. Dr. Hyles clearly taught that one must simply say a little prayer. No repentance needed, nothing but a little prayer. By his example, one would not even need to understand why he is praying such a prayer...just say the little prayer.

He contradicts himself more than once. He says that one would need to know he was a sinner but then gives the example where he clearly tricked the couple into praying a little prayer which they clearly did not even understand why they were doing so; they thought it was for a "home dedication."

He also states that there is nothing a person must do in order to be saved because Jesus did it all, yet throughout his little book he clearly teaches that one MUST say a little prayer. Which is it? Nothing or a little prayer?

[irishman]

On Page 34 he writes:

21. Show him that he is a sinner.
Rom. 3:10, 3:23
22. Show him the price on sin.
Rom 5:12, 6L:23
23. Show him that Jesus paid the price.
Rom. 5:8

Review.

What is wrong with that?

You mentioned “repentance”. There has been differences for years among fundamentalist as to what and when repentance takes place. My post under “trying the spirits” gives several ways to try the spirits from 1 John, none of them mention repentance. Acts 16:31 does not mention repentance, nor does Rom 10:9,10. I agree that there must be repentance, but probably not in the way you are thinking.

Most of “Let’s Go Soul Winning” is written for the soul winner, not the lost. Concerning the lost man, it gives a clear and accurate presentation of the Gospel.

[Salyan]

Irishman, I just went and read the book. I saw the clear gospel presentation you just mentioned above, but I also saw where he on occasion seemed to manipulate people into just praying (like the home dedication example dantheman gave). The two examples seem... inconsistent. How would you explain the instance of the home dedication prayer?

[dantheman2]

On Page 34 he writes:

21. Show him that he is a sinner.
Rom. 3:10, 3:23
22. Show him the price on sin.
Rom 5:12, 6L:23
23. Show him that Jesus paid the price.
Rom. 5:8

Review.

What is wrong with that?

You mentioned “repentance”. There has been differences for years among fundamentalist as to what and when repentance takes place. My post under “trying the spirits” gives several ways to try the spirits from 1 John, none of them mention repentance. Acts 16:31 does not mention repentance, nor does Rom 10:9,10. I agree that there must be repentance, but probably not in the way you are thinking.

Most of “Let’s Go Soul Winning” is written for the soul winner, not the lost. Concerning the lost man, it gives a clear and accurate presentation of the Gospel.

I am sorry that you are offended by what I said. I certainly do not wish to offend anyone, but I can not go against the truth so as not to offend either. I will simply say I stand by what I posted above and leave it at that.

[irishman]

dantheman I am not offended, and I am sorry if I came across that way. As for the "trickery", I am not sure I agree with the tactic, either, but then the people were sure when Dr. Hyles left, which didn't seem to be case when he arrived. He simply helped them make sure, if he didn't lead them to the Lord.

I wonder sometimes if we don't go far enough tho8gh when someone tells us they are saved. I have won Catholics to the Lord who thought they were saved, and I had to get them lost first! At least they heard it, and that is our sole responsibility.

[Pastorj]

It is our responsibility to give the Gospel. It is not our resposibility to "Win them" to Christ. Only God can save and if they have no understanding of what they are praying, they are not saved. I can get people to pray and then tell them they are saved and they are sure they are saved, but they are not trusing in the Word of God for salvation, they are trusting in my word. Big difference.

[irishman]

pastorj,
Do you know they are not saved? I ask honestly, and not maliciously, but they claimed already to believe, and they said thay understood.

[Seth Doty]

"Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

The problems that arise with the hyles type approach is that it equals mental or verbal agreement with heart belief. While that can be the case, many times it is not. Some people believe in the same way the devils believe in James 2:19. They believe in their head, but their heart does not. Hyles type personal evangelism goes something roughly like this example:

(Christian) Hi there, did you know Jesus Christ died for you and wants to save you from hell?
(lost person)Yes, I have heard that.
(Christian)Do you want me to show you from the bible how you can know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are saved?
(lost person) Sure.
(Christian)Ok, look at this: "Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." and this: "Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Do you believe Jesus is God and died for your sins?
(lost person) Yes.
(Christian)Would you like to make a public profession of of that and be saved?
(lost person) alright.
(Christian) Then repeat after me, "Dear Jesus"
(lost person) "Dear Jesus"
(Christian) "I know I am a sinner."
(lost person) "I know I am a sinner."
(Christian) "Thank you for dying on the cross to cleanse me of all my sin."
(lost person) "Thank you for dying on the cross to cleanse me of all my sin."
(Christian) "please come into my heart and save me."
(lost person) "please come into my heart and save me."
(Christian) Ok, according to the word of God your now saved and a child of God, isn't that a wonderful feeling?
(lost person) umm.. Yes.
(Christian) Great! I am so happy for you. Tell you what, if you want to grow in the Lord come to my church next sunday at:(insert directions).
(lost person) ok.
(Christian) Alright, see you then, bye.
(lost person) bye.( and may or may not go to the church)

Now is it possible for a person to be saved when the gospel is presented in such a 1,2,3 pray after me manner even when the word repentance is never mentioned? Absolutely, no doubt about it. Many people have been genuinely saved with nothing more detailed than that. After all the thief on the cross was saved when he made no more of a profession of faith than asking the Lord by faith to remember him when the Lord came into his kingdom. The problem is that while some people are ready to be saved with such a approach because God was already working in their heart and they were truly ready to believe the hearts of many more are not ready at all. They end up praying a prayer more because of a general mental agreement and mentally not wanting to go to hell yet their heart is not really ready and thus they are not saved. In spite of that they are assured they are saved "based on the word of God". That "assurance" is not necessarily sound interpretation of the scriptures particularly when their lives show no other sign of having experienced a true conversion. If it so be that they fall for that "assurance" when they are not really saved they are indeed a "twofold child of hell" as has been mentioned. That danger is the one of the biggest concerns and realities of Hyles style evangelism and it is no doubt why that methodology ends up with so many "professions" yet in comparison so few who continue in Christ. It is exceptionally rough on children. Now does making sure repentance is taught guarantee that someone who chooses to make a profession faith is going to be truly saved? No, but it does at least tend to make the hearer aware that as a seed requires the right conditions to germinate likewise salvation requires the right kind of heart to occur and it isn't just a automatic result when you repeat the "magic" words.

[irishman]

I believe it was Dr. Hyles that said, "lead everyone you meet to Christ, and if they were not supposed to be saved, God will forgive you anyway", or something very similar to that.

[Pastorj]

Seth,
Exactly. They will get people to pray even if they don't want to.

Irishman,
I can't speak for every situation. I can only tell you that I have gone with a number of Hyles grads out soul-winning and have personally experience false conversions, including the ones I have already mentioned.

[irishman]

Just for the record...I do not agree with everything Bro. Hyles comes up with, but I do not consider him a heretic, even if his followers distort things he teaches.