Sunday, 05 April 2009
-
How Should We Evangelize?
A friend called me tonight while on a break from work. From her tone I could sense she was upset. Although we only talk every couple of months and live hundreds of miles away from each other, she abandoned any catching up and dove straight into her frustration.
“I blew a perfectly good opportunity to witness to a co-worker yesterday,” she confessed into her side of the phone.
“Tell me about it,” I said, relieved that the issue was just one of emotional guilt and not something potentially more tragic with her or one of our common friends.
“Well, he was the one that brought religion up. He knows that I am a Christian and wanted to discuss a book that he is reading about God. I knew the book. I picked it up a couple of years ago since it sounded Christian, but once I started reading it I realized that the author wasn’t talking about God the way I knew God so I got rid of it. It was really new-agey”
I knew which book she was referring to and told her so.
She continued, “At one point we discussed our views of heaven,” she continued, “and I should have pounced on the chance to…”
And I cringed as I waited for her to complete the sentence, hoping it wouldn’t be one of the following:
A) Set him straight
B) Scare him into heaven
C) Get him saved
D) All of the above
I really hoped she’d just say, “…introduce him to Jesus.”
“…share the gospel with him,” she finished, which was better than I feared. But now she was beating herself up with guilt and condemnation because she hadn’t been a good evangelist, as she has been raised her whole life to be.
Without going into our whole work-break discourse, here are the ideas we discussed:- This man is on a spiritual journey, which is a good thing.
- God happens to be the conductor of this gospel train.
- My friend has created a safe space in which this man was willing to discuss spiritual things. This sacred space is worth protecting and is worth nurturing.
- Agendas can easily and sometimes permanently contaminate sacred space.
- God’s love is bigger and better than any of our agendas.
More relaxed, she then reflected on why she had got so worked up. I suggested that she was shoulding on herself again. She laughed, as she usually does when I catch her in her shoulds. Shaking them off isn’t so easy. I know they aren’t for me. In our house we treat the should word as legalistic cussing.
It makes sense that we want to share the love that we have with Jesus to others. What often gets in the way though is a program, a system, a plan and an agenda. Jesus certainly was a good evangelist of the Kingdom, but he did it with crazy, open-handed invitations- like he said to a group of roughneck fishermen, “Hey, drop what you're doing and I show you how to REALLY fish!”
You’d think that the Son of God could command some people to flat out obey him if he wanted to. The point is, he didn’t want to. He doesn’t roll that way. Why should we?
Even the great evangelist Paul wrote that he didn’t preach with persuasive words and impressive wisdom, instead in weakness and trembling relied on the Spirit of God. And it is God’s kindness that leads us to real repentance, heart-transforming repentance, and isn’t that what we really want for our friends?
Before she hung up, my friend told me she knew what was in her heart to do. “I want to live my life out in such a way that my co worker sees Jesus, recognizes Jesus,” she said.
And knowing her, that is exactly what she has been, and will continue to do.
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: ChadEstes
- Name: Chad
- About Me: I am on a journey from fear to love, from rules to relationship, and from religion to freedom!
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 11 Views: 0 10233 Comments: 0 324 View all posts by ChadEstes
Comments (32)
Excellent points. I think that we have all have this image of an evangelist as someone who runs around screaming about how people must get saved, preaching on street corners with bullhorns, shaking our Bibles in peoples faces.
Evangelism in its most perfect form (I believe) should be such a natural extension of our relationship with the Lord that we hardly notice that we're doing; it's just who we are.
@mo_chic_for_jesus@xanga - Truly effective evangelism would probably be something that the convertee hardly notices that you're doing, either...
I find the above story a little amusing/disturbing. So this guy was reading a book about God, and just because it didn't conform 100% to your friend's idea of God, it was wrong and she had to "set him straight" (whether she used those words or not). If people are going to ultimately end up at the same place in their belief, why does it matter how they got there? Just because one person isn't led to God by a "new-agey" book doesn't mean someone else won't be. That's the beauty of human experience: we all see things through our own lens.
@LadyLibellule@xanga - but if its wrong its wrong. yes people can be led to God by stuff like that, but the amount of correction that needs to be done to set him straight about who God really is can make it hard on their early Christian life. If they have a false view of who God is, it can effect the rest of their Christian life and it can keep them from reaching their full potential.
@squanto_07@xanga - but who determines what the correct view of God is? i mean, how many Christian denominations are there? only one of them can be 100% right. to insist that you know the true persona of God, when you can't even possibly know how they might view Him, is complete arrogance.
@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - I would argue that none of them are 100% right, because there is no set answer for a lot of things. predestination/free will for example. but other things are really wrong and its obvious they are really wrong. i went to a bible college who believed that the only books of the bible that applied to christians are the Pauline letters. The Gospel, hebrews-revelations, and the whole old testament did not apply to them, that is a serious mistake and it is completely wrong. i am not saying that if its a grey area we should say its wrong i am saying if its obviously wrong then we need to say so.
@squanto_07@xanga -
"i went to a bible college who believed that
the only books of the bible that applied to christians are the Pauline
letters. The Gospel, hebrews-revelations, and the whole old testament
did not apply to them, that is a serious mistake and it is completely
wrong."
how so? logically, it makes sense... the type of Christianity practiced today is definitely Pauline. it's certainly not early Judaism (the OT/Tanakh) or a variant of Judaism (the types of practices described in at least the Synoptic Gospels... maybe John).
that's exactly my point. you seem very adamant in your belief that it's wrong, but your belief is still just as subjective as theirs. as long as they are not basing it on something that can be proven false beyond all doubt, i don't see how you can be so confident that they're 100% wrong. so again, i ask... who determines the gray areas? (nevermind that i think there shouldn't be gray areas in a faith which claims to be the only true one)
@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
At the time that this was written the only books that were considered Scriptures were the Old Testament books, but this was written in the Dispensation of Grace, or the Covenant of Grace (whichever one you believe in). If during our time period Paul says that the Old Testament is profitable for Doctrine then it is obviously wrong to say that they only books of the Bible that apply to them are the Pauline ones. The fact that Paul himself says that the Old Testament is good for Doctrine says that they are wrong.
I think before we can evangelize effectively we have to understand what we are evangelizing. Yes, Paul said that he didn't preach with words from human wisdom, but you have to understand what Paul was talking about in that scripture. He gave testament to the fact that he received the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:12) which he said made clearly known to him what he had freely given, then he proceeded to say and this was not taught with fancy words but with spiritual words (v13), then he said that the Natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit (which is what he was talking about that had been revealed to him) (v14).
So while you are right that the things of God are not presented with fancy speech, but rather by the Spirit, Paul just attested that a worldly person cannot understand the things of the Spirit... this is the challenge presented to the 'evangelist'. How do you convey a spiritual concept to a nonspiritual person?
Well that is what Jesus accomplished (among other things) on the cross- he communicated (during his entire life) in a way that man could understand (washing feet and dying for his enemies), Paul knew this and that is why he said that if you have all the gifts of God, but not love, it is meaningless.
"Evangelism" is, then, the gospel presented (both in word and action- the two are inseparable) in love. This then begs the question "What is the gospel"- that is a longer answer and not the question asked. But I think one has to have a powerful understanding of the Gospel before one can evangelize... otherwise what are you evangelizing for? Your church congregation? Denomination? Club?
Anyway, awesome post, and great question. Thank you for asking a question that has to be thought about.
I really needed this post, because my friends of Campus Crusade for Christ at my college have organized "Gospel Fridays," in which they go out in groups around campus passing out pamphlets and talking to people about Jesus. I feel like I've been pressured and guilt-tripped into joining them because to them, this is the only "right" way to share the gospel.
As for me, I think everyone has different spiritual gifts, and striking up conversations about Jesus with random strangers is just not for me. I think I'm the type of person who offers people the shoulder to cry on and shares the gospel through love and kindness when my friends are going through a hard time.
My faith is something that all my friends know about, and so they know that if they have questions or would like to discuss it, they can come to me without fear of being judged or condemned. I enjoy having religious discussions with my friends, and even though none of them have dropped to their knees and gotten saved in my presence, I really believe that I've at least "planted seeds," so to speak, and have gotten them thinking.
I feel like a "bad" Christian because I cringe whenever I see street preachers yelling about hell and the end times. I think that approach can scare people off more than anything else, although perhaps some people do end up getting saved that way. All I know is, before I became a Christian, I couldn't stand it when people would shove pamphlets in my face and ask me personal questions about my beliefs. So I choose not to evangelize that way.
@sarahzthoughts@xanga - Oh Cru.....
(I'm part of the band for UofM's Cru...there are a lot of good people, with several lines of thinking that are a might misguided...)
Anyways.
Cringing when you hear hellfire and brimstone preachers screaming out hate in the name of Jesus Christ doesn't make you a bad Christian. And neither does not handing out KGP tracts with Cru. You are 100% correct in that we all have spiritual gifts that compliment and overlap each other, but are still distinct. I've been on Cru's little spiritual conversation escapades, and they're interesting. I've seen good conversations coming out of them, but that is by no means the only (nor, I would argue, the best) way of evangelizing.
Just keep doing what you're doing until you feel God pulling you in a different direction. Next time Cru people start guilt-tripping you into going to a "Gospel Friday," break out 1st Corinthians 12 and ask 'em how they're feeling :P
Or you could do what I did: systematically go through the entirety of the process and pointing out everything wrong with it in excrutiating detail. It works, though probably not the best way of going about it.
God Bless
@LadyLibellule@xanga -
If people are going to ultimately end up at the same place in their belief, why does it matter how they got there?
It doesn't, but that's assuming everyone will end up at the same place. That's a controversial topic that has to be justified before it can be used as a premise in an argument
That's the beauty of human experience: we all see things through our own lens.
Okay, but suppose one person is wearing blue-tinted glass and one is wearing clear lenses...if you were wearing blue glasses, wouldn't you want someone wearing clear ones to show you how much brighter and more colorful the world really is? Taking the analogy further...humanity is incapable of seeing everything in the world as it really is (i.e. we have severe astigmatism...or nearsightedness if you prefer; I'm going to take this as a given here, contest it as you like). Therefore we need prescription glasses to see the world better. Wouldn't you want the best glasses possible? Not all lenses are equal. If you want to view the world through sunglasses that are too weak a prescription for your eyes, then far be it from me to say you can't, but it would be incredibly selfish of me to not tell you about--and give you directions to--a store where you can buy better glasses that will help you see the world better.
That's the idea (roughly) behind evangelism. Does it make more sense?
You wrote "“I want to live my life out in such a way that my co worker sees Jesus, recognizes Jesus,” she said. And knowing her, that is exactly what she has been, and will continue to do."
First I want to say I enjoyed and agree with much of your post. I would like to examine the above statements however. Is it your and hers notion that a person can come to Christ based on how a person behaves? I loved the positive points you mentioned above but I was wondering if there was any positive exhortation to "be ready in season and out of season to give a reason for the hope you have"? An exhortation to always be ready to preach the good news?
I have often heard of Christians speak of their witnessing as "witnessing with my lifestyle". I usually ask them in what manner of Holy living do you expect them to see you and then by way of your behavior come to understand Christs atoning death on the cross and resurrection from the dead for the forgiveness of sins? Is it possible to see and understand the message of Jesus without actually having the gospel explained (faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God)?
I think you need to encourage your friend to be ready. You never know when the Lord will provide a divine appointment next...
@sarahzthoughts@xanga - I truly understand what you are saying about the people who attack with their books and rhetoric. I would like to ask you however, when it comes to evangelism and other methods that you are more inclined too... Are you seizing those opportunities to give the good news? Sometimes Christians are trigger shy in those situations too... The gospel is exclusive and narrow, violent and bloody, and very offensive. Those things usually make a person think twice about possibly ruining the friendship or moment...
@deepestrecesses - You wrote "Evangelism" is, then, the gospel presented (both in word and action- the two are inseparable)"
That is an interesting statement. Can you expand more on what you mean by the action part? Then, how are they inseparable?
@MC_Shann@xanga - I wouldn't have mentioned those "other methods" if I wasn't sincere about doing them. That's another thing that irritates me about my Crusade friends...they seem to think that just because the "pamphlet method" isn't a good way to evangelize for one Christian, they don't take advantage of those "other opportunities" that you mention, and that attitude makes me sick, as if it's once again reinforcing the belief that pamphlet-passing is the only effective way to evangelize.
You have to realize that every situation where an opportunity pops up is different and should be viewed as a case-by-case basis. If a person has specific questions about the gospel, I will gladly answer them. But other times, if I'm with a friend who is struggling with loneliness, depression or something, it's crucial to be gentle with the way you talk to them so you don't make things worse. I'll probably say something to the effect of "How do you deal with (insert problem here)? Have you ever tried praying about it and looking to God for answers instead of (insert coping vice here, like drinking, sex, etc)? Do you mind if I tell you how God has helped me in this area?"
Because the gospel is offensive, like you said, we don't want to shove it in people's faces in a "take it or leave it" manner. And you may not get through in just one encounter. The important thing is to plant the seeds and get them thinking and let them know you are a trustworthy person to talk to about it, rather than have them fear you and get the feeling that you look down on them because they aren't Christian,
You don't need an opportunity to witness. You just tell them the gospel.
@squanto_07@xanga - sure, it's good for doctrine. early Christianity relied on the Jewish books to prove Jesus' divinity. but i would still argue that they're essentially useless when it comes to discussing exactly how a Christian should live. Paul worked very hard to remove the requirements of Jewish law for anyone who wanted to follow Jesus. as it stands now, Christians tend to pick and choose which parts of the OT are useful.
but we're getting off track. i would argue that the only true foundation of Christianity is anything attributed directly to Jesus, and not just to his followers. anything else could be considered a gray area, because we have no absolute way of knowing whether Jesus himself would have agreed. yet, i see Christians referencing Paul more than their savior.
@sheepthatsblack@xanga - but that begs the question: how does a Christian claiming that he or she has the right prescription prove anything? where is the proof that it isn't you who is wearing the blue-tinted lenses? and since when does one type of lens work for everyone? i would argue that the simple fact that there are multiple faiths indicates that no religion yet in existence has been proven to fit everyone on the planet. personally, Christianity's prescription is either too strong or too weak for me, depending on which denomination i look at.
@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - Its what God demands, not what you think you need. The prescription is perfect, just sometimes when you first put the spectacles on it causes headaches for the first week or so because your eyes/brain are not used to it. you say that just because there are many faiths proves that there is none that fits everyone on the planet, but thats not true. Christianity does fit everyone, just some people choose not to accept it. Also Satan corrupts, he is working at corrupting now and he has been working to corrupt since he was kicked out of heaven, that is why we have so many faiths and religions. Just because someone does not want to follow the rules of the Bible does not mean that they do not apply to them, the creator of the universe says that they apply so they apply end of story. If a person does not agree with this and chooses not to follow the Bible then the person receives the natural consequences.
@sheepthatsblack@xanga - You're assuming your optometrist is right and everyone else's is wrong.
@squanto_07@xanga - "Also Satan corrupts, he is working at
corrupting now and he has been working to corrupt since he was kicked
out of heaven, that is why we have so many faiths and religions."
Satan was kicked out of heaven long before Jesus came along. Taking that into account, how can you be sure that Christianity isn't the devil's biggest prank of all?
@squanto_07@xanga -
"Its what God demands, not what you think you need."
then what God demands of me should be obviously beneficial. why would i choose to follow a religion that makes no sense to me and leaves me with a huge amount of cognitive dissonance?
"you say that just because there are many
faiths proves that there is none that fits everyone on the planet, but
thats not true. Christianity does fit everyone, just some people choose
not to accept it."
that screams arrogance. sorry, but i was Christian for a long time. the religion does not fit with what i think is right for myself, or humanity as a whole. perhaps when my questions are successfully answered, i will choose to go back.
"Also Satan corrupts, he is working at
corrupting now and he has been working to corrupt since he was kicked
out of heaven, that is why we have so many faiths and religions."
including the other Abrahamic faiths which describe him as evil, too. yes, that makes a lot of sense.
"ust because someone does not want to follow
the rules of the Bible does not mean that they do not apply to them,
the creator of the universe says that they apply so they apply end of
story."
why would you expect a non-Christian to recognize the Bible as having any authority, or being any more important than any other religious text? again, arrogance. or at the very least, naivety.
"If a person does not agree with this and chooses not to follow the Bible then the person receives the natural consequences. "
works for me. if God has logic as terrible as yours, i'd rather not count myself as a follower. i'm not going to ascribe to a faith that makes zero sense.
@MC_Shann@xanga - Sure. "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the afflicted; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to captives and freedom to prisoners... to comfort all who mourn..." (Isaiah 61:1-2). See Isaiah brought the Good news (which the Spirit of God brought to him in power) as a ambassador of Gods with good actions.
You could see that same thing from Jesus himself. The man called "John the Baptist" had heard about the actions that Jesus had been performing and sent his disciples to Jesus to ask if he was "the One". By the Actions of Jesus, John knew him (Matt 11:2-6). John was the "forerunner" of the Gospel and John recognized the actions that came with "the Gospel".
Apart from action there can be no good news. If there was no good action that this "news" was proclaiming.
I wrote an article on this at my web-site
http://deepestrecesses.revelife.com/697045645/evangelism-amwayish/
if you would like a slightly more in depth look at it.
If I were to take you to the word for "gospel" (euangelion) in greek and then compare the word for "evangelism" (euangelizo or euangelisis) you would see that the two are virtually the exact same thing, one means "good news" and the following means "proclaimer of the good news" or "messenger". That is why in my article I make the point that Evangelism and the Gospel are so close.
Did that (and my article) help clarify some?
Great post.... you gave good advice/direction/suggestions.
I look to St. Francis for my evangelical tone... "Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words." When they can see Jesus living in me, when they can see that I am different, and they want to know why, I am ready to tell them. He has done all the hard work, changing me... I just have to tell about what He has done for me. The rest is up to them, and to Him.
Create a prospect list, pray for the names written on it before evangelizing.
We are all soul-winners, Amen?
=)
@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - you are correct. I think we need to take the whole bible not just a few books or a few verses and run with them. When people do that they are missing out on quite a few messages that God has for us.
There are several that believe the Old Testament don't apply to us today as Christians but there are quite a few messages there that apply to us in an everyday way.
There are quite a few prophetic passages that definitely apply to end times and we don't want to miss out on them.
As for witnessing, I do believe that the best witness is the silent one.
Don't just preach it but live it.