in defense of the sinner's prayer
in defense of the sinner's prayer
ABOUT THE "SINNER'S PRAYER"...A DEFENSE
September 7th, 2026
I recently read a sharp criticism of the common evangelical practice of leading someone in what we call “the sinner’s prayer.” The argument was familiar: the sinner’s prayer is absent from the historic Church, it is a relatively recent evangelical invention, and, more seriously, it can give people the false impression that saying a prayer completes salvation and eliminates the need for genuine discipleship and sanctification.
There are legitimate criticisms to make of evangelical evangelism. Emotional manipulation is wrong. Pressuring someone into a decision is wrong. Treating a raised hand or repeated prayer as incontrovertible evidence of regeneration is pastorally irresponsible. And if we lead someone in a prayer and then send them on their way without baptism, Christian community, discipleship, holiness, worship, sacrament, encountering the Holy Spirit, and a lifetime of following Jesus, we have given them an impoverished picture of the Christian life.
But I think the criticism of the sinner’s prayer itself is often overstated and historically uneven.
It is certainly true that we do not find a first-century Christian service containing an altar call exactly as we might experience one in a modern evangelical church. Peter did not ask every head to bow and every eye to close while someone played softly behind him.
But that observation proves very little.
Christian practices develop in their terminology, form, and expression. This happens in every Christian tradition, including those that rightly emphasize continuity with the historic Church. Later Christians develop terminology and practices to express ideas they believe are already present in Scripture and the apostolic faith. The important historical question, therefore, cannot simply be, “Can I find this exact terminology and practice in the first century?” The better question is whether the practice faithfully expresses something we find in the apostolic witness.
And when we ask that question about evangelistic invitation, the New Testament evidence is not difficult to find.
Peter preaches Christ at Pentecost. His hearers are “cut to the heart” and ask, “What shall we do?” Peter responds by calling them to repentance and baptism (Acts 2:37–41).
Philip proclaims Christ to the Ethiopian eunuch, and the proclamation produces an immediate response (Acts 8:26–39).
Paul and Silas encounter a terrified jailer who asks, “What must I do to be saved?” They do not tell him to spend the next several months considering Christianity. They direct him to faith in Christ, proclaim the word of the Lord to his household, and baptize them (Acts 16:30–34).
Paul himself describes salvation using the language of believing, confessing Jesus as Lord, and “calling on the name of the Lord” (Romans 10:9–13).
The New Testament pattern is remarkably consistent:
The gospel is proclaimed. People are convicted. They are called to respond. They repent, believe, confess Christ, are baptized, and enter the life of the Christian community.
The modern altar call is one developed expression of that much older reality. Its particular shape has changed. The fundamental idea has not.
I also think critics sometimes misunderstand what evangelicals ordinarily mean by “the sinner’s prayer.”
Certainly, there have been bad examples. But in decades of evangelical Christianity, I have rarely heard a responsible evangelist suggest that certain words possess supernatural power simply because someone repeats them correctly.
Usually there is an important qualifier, either explicitly stated or strongly implied: If you prayed that prayer and genuinely meant it…
Even that language could be improved, because our confidence ultimately rests in Christ rather than in the intensity of our sincerity. But the meaning is fairly obvious. The evangelist is saying that if this prayer genuinely expresses your repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, you can trust Christ’s promises concerning forgiveness and new life.
The prayer does not save you.
Jesus saves you.
The prayer simply gives a person words through which to express repentance, faith, confession, and surrender to Christ.
In that sense, I think of the sinner’s prayer as a guardrail. A person has heard the gospel and wants to respond but may have no idea what to say. So another Christian says, in effect, “Let me help you talk to God.”
I struggle to see what is inherently objectionable about that.
Jesus himself gave his disciples words with which to pray: “When you pray, say…” (Luke 11:2). The Lord’s Prayer is obviously not an evangelistic prayer of conversion, but it establishes that giving another person words to help them pray does not make their prayer artificial.
A sinner wants to call upon Christ. Another Christian helps that sinner put repentance and faith into words.
That is not magic. It is pastoral ministry.
I am also hesitant about critiques suggesting that emphasizing a moment of conversion necessarily produces an inadequate understanding of salvation.
The New Testament frequently speaks about genuine moments of transition.
We are justified by faith (Romans 5:1). We are transferred from the domain of darkness into the kingdom of Christ (Colossians 1:13). The person who is in Christ is a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). Jesus can speak of someone passing from death into life (John 5:24).
There really is a before and an after.
That does not mean everyone must know the exact date and time of his or her conversion. Someone raised within the Church may have trusted Christ from childhood and be completely unable to identify a particular moment when faith began. We should not manufacture a crisis experience for someone simply because another Christian had one.
But neither should we move in the opposite direction and deny the validity of a crisis moment.
Sometimes someone really does encounter Christ, and everything changes.
Part of this disagreement may also come from Christians using the word salvation differently and consequently talking past one another.
When an evangelical says, “I was saved on this particular day,” we usually are not claiming that every dimension of salvation and sanctification was completed at that moment.
The New Testament itself speaks about salvation in past, present, and future categories. We have been saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8). Paul describes those who are being saved (1 Corinthians 1:18). And Scripture can still speak of salvation as something awaiting its final consummation (Romans 5:9–10; 13:11).
Evangelical theology has commonly distinguished these dimensions.
At conversion, the sinner repents, believes, receives forgiveness, is justified, and begins new life in Christ. Yet salvation from the power and pull of sin is worked out through the continuing process of sanctification. And we still await the day when Christ completes his work, raises the dead, restores creation, and finally delivers us from the presence of sin.
So I can say both:
“I was saved.”
and
“God is still saving me.”
I can even say that I am waiting for the day when my salvation will finally be complete.
Those statements are not contradictory.
This is where my larger concern lies.
I sometimes fear that, in our attempts to correct the excesses of evangelicalism, we develop an unnecessary suspicion toward some remarkably effective and, I believe, God-ordained evangelistic practices.
By all means, critique manipulation.
Critique shallow decisionism.
Critique evangelists who boast about conversion statistics.
Critique churches that get someone to raise a hand and then provide no meaningful pathway toward baptism, community, spiritual formation, holiness, service, or lifelong discipleship.
But please do not respond to bad evangelism by becoming embarrassed about calling people to Christ.
Preach the gospel.
Call people to repentance.
Invite them to believe.
Ask them to respond.
And when someone says, “Yes. I want Jesus, but I don’t even know what to say,” there is nothing wrong with answering, “Then let me pray with you.”
The sinner’s prayer is not the finish line of discipleship.
It can be a perfectly good way of crossing the starting line.
For me, this isn’t merely an academic argument.
On March 20, 1994, Jeff Steinburg led me in a prayer to accept Christ.
I will always be grateful that he did.
I do not believe the particular arrangement of words I repeated that day possessed magical power. I do not believe Jeff saved me. I certainly do not believe that my sanctification was completed when that prayer ended. More than three decades of following Jesus have thoroughly disabused me of that idea.
But I believe something happened that day.
I was a sinner turning toward Christ, and another Christian helped me put words to my repentance and faith. He didn’t merely explain the gospel to me. He helped me respond to it.
That prayer wasn’t the completion of my Christian life.
It was the beginning.
And after all these years, I remain profoundly grateful that someone cared enough about my soul not merely to tell me about Jesus, but to ask me if I was ready to follow him—and then helped me find the words to say yes.
_
Mike