Evangelism has always been an inexact science to say the least. How to count who made what kind of decision to which kind of call is a difficult issue. Often, critics of proclamation evangelism use this difficulty as a basis to discredit evangelistic preaching or other forms of public evangelism. Others insist on standards for counting that are too strict, standards that are not modeled for us anywhere in Scripture. Still others give up altogether and do not try to assess decisions for faith, leaving it up to “the Spirit.” All of these mistakes are intensified by the ambiguity of the definition of “decision.” What is a decision for Christ? How does “decision” differ from “conversion?” Can we have any certitude in either a person’s decision or their conversion this side of Heaven? How do we count, celebrate, follow up, and shape a decision maker’s profession of faith? These are all live and legitimate questions.

The first post-resurrection evangelistic sermon was preached by Peter in Acts 2. A stirring message in itself, the end of the message and subsequent message commentary give us some initial footing in addressing the counting/decision/conversion issue. In Acts 2:40-41 we read, “With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation. Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.” A few observations are helpful to us struggling with the messiness of evangelism today.

First, the count: The count was 3,000 added to their number that day. The text does not say 3,000 people were converted or that their names were written in the lamb’s book of life or that they were saved-simply that they were added to “their number.” The text also doesn’t say that the 3,000 were first verified as legitimate or there was an assessment period to see if their decisions bore fruit. What does the phrase “added to their number” actually mean? Prior to this message, in chapter one, the female disciples along with the 11 apostles were together with a larger group-all totaling around 120 “Jesus followers.” What is interesting is the repetition of the phrase “was added” and the emphasis in chapters 1 and 2 on numbering. Numbering appears in 1:13,14,15,17,21,26 and 2:39,41,47. In 2:47, the Lord “added to their number” and then the phrase appears “those who were being saved.” It would appear that the way in which the counting of the 3,000 and those “added” daily who were being saved is used in the same manner. Luke throughout Acts records numbers of people who are “added” to the community of the “saved” in a way that may be bothersome to many today. Luke records the “add” as the total number of those being “saved.” How can he be so sure? What about those who turn their back on Christ and the Way? To be sure, this happened all the time and of those being added daily or of the 3,000 added after the first evangelistic message, we can be almost certain that some of them eventually rejected their decision.

Second, the warning: The second important observation in the text is the fact that Peter warns the crowd to “save themselves from this corrupt generation.” The evangelistic call had a sense of urgency, of drastic separation from an already condemned generation of which the hearers were a part. He did not try to give an assurance of salvation or calm the fears of those perishing, he sternly warned them to save themselves. Obviously, Peter did not mean that they, in and of themselves, could literally save themselves, but in the context of his larger message, the call to repent and place faith in Christ’s finished work was the means by which they would be saved. His warning demonstrates what we are calling people to and what we are calling them away from. We are calling them to change allegiances, to recognize sin, to leave their identity and become a part of Christ’s new community of repentant and faith-filled believers (the grand picture of which is provided for us at the end of Acts 2). This is important in what we count. Often, counting decisions gets corrupted because the call to Christ is not clear. This is where legitimate criticism can be aimed at much evangelistic preaching as often the call is so ambiguous, so watered down that we cannot be sure what people have responded to. In such cases, we are almost always left to allow the respondent to self-assess what happened before we count. This was not the case in Peter’s message. He called for repentance, people demonstrated their response by coming forward to be baptized and the community took at face value the legitimacy of all 3,000 who came forward. There was not a re-assessment after the follow-up team had meetings with the 3,000, there was an immediate celebration and recognition of full membership in the “they” Luke refers to as the entire community of faith throughout chapters one and two. The warning, however, places the burden on the decision maker. Peter’s instruction is in the present tense and throughout the epistles, the warning to “be” saved, or walk according to the grace given us remains a source of challenge for all who follow Christ to re-examine continuously our allegiance to Him.

Third, the baptism: Water baptism is so much more than a mere physical indication of a person’s inner decision but it is at least that here in the text. In my evangelistic preaching I’ve used various physical mechanisms to give the decision maker an opportunity to visibly demonstrate her faith. Whether they’ve been items like glow sticks, water, sand, fire, marbles, free-standing doors, coloring on walls, receiving an empty glass to be filled, or simply coming forward, securing some visible and often external item to express faith is important. It is important for two reasons. A visible appropriation of faith (see my larger article on “Re-Thinking Alter Calls” at www.tellthestory.net) allows us to see who and how many people have responded to the call to repent. Second, a visible appropriation of faith is a powerful experiential component to an otherwise personal and inner experience. It would appear from Scripture that there was almost always some visible way, whether miraculous or through human volition, for decision makers to be counted as “added to their numbers.” Water baptism in this passage served this function, though it was certainly not limited to a mere visible appropriation of faith.

Let’s get practical:

There are a number of different “decisions” that can be made when the call to repent is clear.  They include:

•First Time Decisions: A decision by an obvious or self proclaimed non-Christian to follow Christ or a “nominal/cultural Christian’s” decision to become a true Christ-follower.

•Rededicated Decision: A decision to re-affirm one’s salvific faith, to repent of patterns of sin, and re-commit to following Christ as Lord.

•Journey Engagement Decision: Often confused as a salvific decision, people will often respond to a call to repent but not intend to give their lives to Christ as Lord. Such decisions often mark a pivotal point in a faith journey but are short of full trust in Christ.

•The Confused/Unintentional/Insincere Decision: Almost without exception, some will respond to a call to repent because they misunderstood what was being asked of them (no matter how clear the call was) or; they did not intend to respond but were interpreted as doing so or; their response was intentionally insincere. The insincere decision maker responds for all kinds of strange reasons-“I wanted a glow stick,” “I wanted to see what the stage looked like,” “I wanted my picture taken with you,” “I didn’t want you to look bad when nobody came,” “I just wanted to lead the way for others.” These and many other reasons I’ve heard over 20 years of evangelistic preaching.

Some Clarity:

Let’s make some observations about each of these decision makers. The first time decision makers are more obvious and readily accepted for “the count” when they are known or self identifying non-Christians but the count gets messier when a worship leader stands, or an elder or clergy member or life-long church member. Often, event organizers immediately conclude that such respondents are confused/unintentional/insincere decision makers. However, frequently these are nominal/cultural Christians who are authentically making a first time decision. Whether we refer to these as Lordship decisions or 1st time decisions really is immaterial, the decision maker in this category through her response has chosen to “save herself” and she should be counted as being “added” unless there is clear evidence to the contrary.

A “nominal Christian” is a Christian in name only, not in fact. Because of this, a Lordship decision of this type is really a 1st time decision because the nominal/cultural Christian has never been converted, merely religious. Socialized Christians are not converted though they often appear so through their habits and interest in Christian community. They often find themselves serving in leadership roles because they know the culture and language of community but have never repented of sin and placed their trust in Christ. Using this definition gives us permission to include in the count people who have experienced a “spiritual awakening” or “adult decision” and who now consciously follow Christ.

This definition is admittedly very broad; however I think there are 3 reasons why this broad definition for counting is indeed appropriate.

1) The lack of gospel clarity in the church: Many churches in America do not preach the true gospel message or do so unclearly. Also, they rarely call people to faith. Thus, many people who think they are making a recommitment to faith are in fact responding to the gospel for the first time or are making their profession public for the first time. In either case, we should include them in our “count.”

2) The lack of Biblical literacy outside the church: Most people lack the conceptual framework and language for explaining what is spiritually going on inside them. They cannot articulate often what kind of decision they are making are what the implications are when they do so. Again, the precedent in Scripture is to count all responders at face value, to celebrate them and begin enfolding them into community. The rule of thumb should be we count unless there is extant evidence not to do so (admission of confusion, unrepentant life-styles of sin…).

3) Decisions are measurable, conversions are not: Even though we are often still using conversion language (saved, converted, new Christian), we can never truly know whether a person has been saved. We are left with merely the visible representation of people’s decisions and the subsequent spiritual fruit or lack thereof. This means that there will always be ambiguity along the way toward maturity in Christ for people who indicate a decision and even seeming maturity in Christ can be deceptive as many fall away later in life.

Illustration:

Let’s say un-churched Anna makes a visible decision at a conference as a result of an alter call but a year later wants nothing to do with Christ while Hassan, a cultural Christian, makes a visible decision to “recommitment himself to Christ” at a meeting and over the course of the next several weeks begins to bear fruit for the first time in his life. Let’s say Jill makes a decision to follow Jesus as Lord in every area of her life after a life-long tradition of attending church. Jill has significant areas of her life that have never been submitted to Christ including areas of deep sexual sin and relational brokenness but now has been set free and is beginning to joyfully serve in Christian community. Finally, let’s say Tom indicates a “first time decision” on a response card at an evangelistic outreach but later realizes he came to Christ long ago and is only now making a public adult profession of faith. I’ve dealt with these and many other confusing scenarios over the years. Such circumstances make counting a very difficult issue.

Let’s consider why each of these four decision makers should be included as we count those “added” to our numbers.

Anna: Though it is heartbreaking, some decision makers do later go back on their decision, perhaps indicating that they never sincerely came to Christ in the first place. Regardless of how we theologically interpret the range of possibilities, at the time of Anna’s decision, illustrations from Scripture would indicate that we should count Anna, celebrate her decision, hold her to the spiritual expectations of Christian discipleship, and weep later when she turns from Christ, doing all we can to help her hold true to the word of life. In the beginning, however, we count her as a decision maker.

Hassan: Though Hassan has self-identified as a Christian all his life, he has never demonstrated the fruit associated with being filled with the Holy Spirit. He has likely never truly followed Christ though he may have been open all along to authentic discipleship. Hassan needed a clear explanation and call to faith and once he encountered Christ, naturally connected with Jesus and began to demonstrate salvific faith for the first time. Though we may be tempted to consider Hassan’s decision as a recommitment, perhaps he would even say so, in reality his decision is more likely a first time decision as it is associated with first time spiritual fruit demonstrating the regeneration of the Holy Spirit.

Jill: Jill would likely never say of herself that she “became a Christian” since in her interpretation of her spiritual journey, she has been Christian all her life. The evidence of regeneration, however, and freedom from deep bondage may indicate she has become born again. The spiritual fruit emerging in her life is indicative of a person who has encountered Christ and given long-term patterns of bondage and willful disobedient to Christ, the likelihood is that she too has made an authentic first time decision and should be counted.

Tom: Tom’s a slightly different story. Tom’s decision is obviously not a salvific decision but rather an affirmation of previous spiritual realities and decisions made in the past. For young people emerging into adulthood, however, it is important that they own their faith in a conscious way. Tom has already been “saved” but has never truly owned this spiritual status for himself. Many Christian youth find an important right of passage by responding publically as adults. Many times when alter calls are made where emerging adults are present, people like Tom wish to publically profess faith to have confidence in the authenticity of their faith or because they’ve never been given such an opportunity to do so before. Either way, the likelihood is that they’ve not been counted before and the fact that they as emerging adults wish to be counted now should be honored.

“Don’t Count Me”

Finally, the question is who should not be counted as first time decision makers. Obviously the confused/unintentional/insincere decision makers with a little bit of interaction will rise to the surface, often immediately after the decision is indicated. Additionally, clear Christians who merely wish to rededicate themselves or repent of specific struggles and incidents of sin should not be counted either. Often, these are interpreted as “Lordship” decisions but true “Lordship” decisions are more often than not authentically first time decisions for what kind of faith can be saving faith that is devoid of submission to Christ as Lord? It would seem from each and every evangelistic message in the book of Acts that the apostles believed salvation necessitated the eventual confession of Christ as Lord.

A journey decision should also not be counted as a first time decision. This category often takes the most work to follow up with and gain certainty. This is particularly true since frequently journey decision makers lack the sufficient language and theological constructs to self-interpret where they are or what kind of decision they have made. These standards leave a wide latitude open for us to include many who indicate a decision for Christ. This seems to be the practice of the first Church and there really is no reason why we should depart from their practice.