Ray Comfort is an Evangelical evangelist known for his slick (and shallow) evangelism methods. In the late 1990s, I used Comfort’s training materials to train the church I was pastoring at the time to evangelize unbelievers. Comfort is also known for street preaching and publishing books attacking atheism. His claims have been thoroughly refuted by defenders of secularism and atheism.
Yesterday, Comfort wrote an article for The Christian Post criticizing Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson for making restitution for crimes he committed as a teenager:
After being riddled with guilt for years over his sins as a teenager, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson (arguably Hollywood’s highest-paid actor) made amends. We are told that he was able to redeem himself. A video posted online shows him returning to the scene of the crime and buying up hundreds of Snickers bars, giving them to the store, and telling them to give them away to anyone who was tempted to steal.
Before making amends, he said three times in one interview that he wanted to “redeem” himself for his theft. The media loved it, saying that he was indeed “making things right.”
Is that true? Can we balance the scales of justice by doing good works? Millions would say a big “amen,” that it’s certainly the right thing to do.
Of course, Comfort rejects that notion of making restitution for past wrongs. He’s an Evangelical, after all. He preaches a gospel devoid of making things right. If God has forgiven you, that’s all that is needed. Say the right prayer, believe the right things, and you will be gloriously saved. While good works after salvation are a good idea or even expected, they play no part in your salvation.
Comfort makes this clear when he writes:
It was evident that Dwayne Johnson wasn’t trusting in the Savior. Instead, he was trusting in his own attempt to redeem himself, something the Bible says cannot be done.
If Dwayne Johnson bought the entire store and gifted it to the owner, it wouldn’t make things right. Paying off the victim from whom we’ve stolen doesn’t work in criminal court, and it certainly won’t work on Judgment Day. If a one-time monetary payment for theft was able to satisfy God, how would we redeem ourselves for adultery, for fornication, for blasphemy, or for lying? How would we make things right for the sin of lust — which Jesus said is adultery of the heart (Matthew 5:27-28)?
Good works don’t cover our sins in the slightest. A multimillionaire giving $500 to a store may impress the media, but it doesn’t impress God. Any payment we try to make for sin is an abomination to Him (Proverbs 21:27). Yet millions deceive themselves by pacifying their guilty conscience with what the Bible calls “dead works” (Hebrews 6:1).
Comfort’s post makes all sorts of theological arguments for his “gospel.” Give it a read if you want to read a lot of Bible verses and be reminded that the Protestant Christian Bible can be used to prove and justify almost anything. I want to focus on Comfort’s rejection of good works and restitution. I am sure he thinks these things are a good idea, but in order to maintain his soteriological beliefs, he must reject making restitution part of human salvation.
In the comment section of the post titled Dr. David Tee Thinks Everyone Who is Not a Christian is an Atheist, ObstacleChick wrote:
Mr T really is off base if he thinks everyone who isn’t a Christian is an atheist. Tell that to my Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and Jainist friends – they are not atheists. They believe in deities and other supernatural things.
Someone who commits a wrong against another person does not deserve forgiveness from the person(s) harmed just by asking. I like the Jewish model which requires that the one who offended needs to express apology and ask the victim what the VICTIM wants them to do. Then the offender must take genuine steps to atone, as per what the victim stated. The victim is under no obligation to forgive even if the offender fulfills what the victim requested.
Bingo. Jews generally believe in making restitution when wrongs are done; in making things right. Comfort divorces restitution from the Christian gospel. Believe this and thou shalt be saved! The reason for this, of course, is that Evangelicals have a dualistic worldview — the separation of body and spirit (and or soul), of physical and spiritual. Many Jews rightly believe that you cannot separate the physical from the spiritual.
I preach the gospel of restitution. I preached it when I was a Christian pastor and I continue to herald it today. Instead of mass incarceration, we need to adopt a system that promotes restitution for those who commit non-violent crimes. Instead of locking up a man who committed theft and destroying his life, allow him to keep working and pay restitution. Our legal system is focused on punishment instead of rehabilitation and restitution. We can thank Christianity, and Calvinism, in particular, for our current justice system.
Duane Johnson did a good thing. He righted a previous wrong. Instead of complimenting him for doing so, Comfort condemned him and said Johnson was headed for Hell. What are ya gonna do? Evangelicals are gonna Evangelical. Their theology keeps them from seeing that restitution is a good thing for society; far better than mouthing a prayer to the Ceiling God and going on your merry way, secure in the belief that you are saved and headed for God’s Trump Hotel in the sky.
One day, Ray Comfort and his many converts will die and stand before the throne of God. On that day, they will hear the Judge of the universe say:
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
….
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
To Ray Comfort, I say this: repent and make restitution. It’s the only way you will gain entrance into God’s eternal kingdom.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Connect with me on social media:
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.
Ray Comfort will go to his deathbed preaching a gospel devoid of works. Whatever gives him and his fellow Evangelists the edge is what he will say. And yet, their gospel is a complete failure, given the number of young people running from their churches.
Ah yes, Ray Comfort, infamous in the scientific community for his banana argument. Bananas are the result of careful human selection. In effect, they were bred to be what humans like, just like we have done with dogs. Ray Comfort, unaware of this, decided the banana was evidence for special creation. His argument was greeted with howls of laughter in the scientific community. See https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ray-comforts-banana-argument_n_4847082.
My personal experience with Ray Comfort comes from back around 2002 when he quoted an extensive excerpt from my former website in his book, The Way of the Master. (The latest version of his book no longer has this quote.) Comfort quoted me fairly and actually agreed with what I was saying. In the section he quoted, I was discussing the hypocrisy of Christians who say Christ alone is the answer, then turn in despair to secular psychology to find peace in their life. We differed on what to do about it. I say, that, if their real hope is in secular psychology, then they should admit that this is where they find hope. Comfort argued that other Christians were not preaching the true gospel. If everybody had Comfort’s gospel, then they supposedly wouldn’t be struggling with the inadequacy of their faith.
Thanks for sharing Ray “Bananaman” Comfort’s video. It gets me every time.
#1 – I think Ray is opposed to Dwayne Johnson’s act of restitution because it’s a simple reminder to Ray of the fact that he himself still hasn’t publicly repented from making the banana video. Or maybe he has, but is living in denial over the whole thing.
#2 – Also, let’s not forget Ray’s sidekick, Kirk “Crocoduck” Cameron. See video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Az8k0uzQ6sA&t=24s
ray is a typical christian coward and liar. my chat with him still has to find its way onto his youtube channel,despite him being the one videoing it.
When I watch Ray Comfort’s evangelical method it reminds me of that magic trick where a television magician (like “David Copperfield” for example) makes something massive disappear (like the Statue of Liberty for example) “disappear”. Such a trick always frames the view and the “audience” is always in on the gag. By cunningly controlling your viewpoint a magician can make you believe you’re seeing something massive disappear and Comfort can make you believe his framework is sound. The “audience” in my analogy is how the culture is overwhelmingly Christian, so most people are already primed to accept Comfort’s unproven assertion that there is a god who hates sin and that because everyone has done some “sin” YOU need a savior.
As for “the Rock”, I don’t know if that is really great restitution. Is the store owner still the same? Even if not, everyone has already paid higher prices because of petty theft. In addition, with his millions of dollar a few candy bars is a pittance, when he was a kid that would have been a sizeable investment, so he should match his money in proportion to how much it would have cost him as a kid. (Let’s say he made $10/week as a kid and he now makes $2 million/week) To some degree he’s paying it forward instead of paying it back, but with his money he should be doing a lot more if he wants to even the score.
What a strange example for Mr. Comfort to rant against. Presumably, he considers the Bible his authoritative text for morality. Restitution is unambiguously a biblical principle. The bible is explicit in declaring that wrongs committed against other people must be paid back in greater value than the cost of the offense.
I don’t know the motive behind the Rock’s action, but even if he was just showboating for the media, as a role model, this was a good thing for society. I am sure more will be influenced by a celebrity’s good example than an angry zealot condemning good works because they aren’t accompanied with a christian testimony.
@JW It isn’t really a strange example. No doubt when people were saying the Rock “redeemed himself” Ray’s ears perked up a bit. I recall reading an evangelist’s essay that took umbrage of something sports commentators commonly say that a player redeemed himself. (The essayist asserting that no one can redeem himself, only Christ can do that!) Ray is of course applying the Christian lingo context of the word “redeem” and why miss an opportunity to knock a celebrity down a peg?
Seems sort of backwards, doesn’t it? If anything, we (collective society) need more good examples from influencers. God knows 😉 there are plenty of bad examples to draw from.
Ray could have acknowledged that it’s right to make amends for harm you cause others before launching into his whole ‘dirty rags’ condemnation. How hard would it have been to at least write something like this:
“Good on the Rock, it was the right thing to do! But you know, if God is really convicting you of sin, you need to think about God’s standards as well….”
I might not agree with the conclusion that follows, but I’d respect the preacher more for it. I guess the whole ‘with gentleness and respect’ thing is in that section Ray skipped over. (Note to Ray, it’s in 1 Peter 3 in case you want to brush up)
Evangelicals seem to need a way to continue being judgy. Dwayne Johnson was trying to set an example for his followers, many of whom are youths. When Dwayne admits that he did something wrong and does something to show others an example of trying to make restitution, it’s a powerful example for others to see. Evangelicals believe that we are all vile sinners whose works are like “filthy rags”. Where does Ray Comfort get his vision of whether Dwayne Johnson is “saved”? Did he bother to ask Dwayne? Nope. Ray decided to judge on his own and to condemn Dwayne for being an example. Maybe Dwayne is the “right” brand of Christian and believes his deity instructed him to do this act of restitution. Ray didn’t bother to ask – he just “knows”.
Bruce said, “Their theology keeps them from seeing that restitution is a good thing for society…”
Watching the results of the evil scrunch of Evangelical religion and politics in the US, it’s clear that many Evangelicals don’t care about what’s good for society. They’re told to be not of the world, so the world’s problems aren’t something they need to consider. (Obviously that doesn’t apply to everyone who identifies as an Evangelical Christian, and there are those who are determined to help society, example President Carter.) Still, a whole lot of citizens who don’t give the proverbial rat’s behind for their fellow citizens and who vote are a serious problem.
Do You Smell What the Rock Is Cooking?