Skip to main content

Review: Evangelism More Caught than Taught

I teach Evangelism & Discipleship I & II online for a Christian University in Ohio. I was looking over an assignment that really threw me for a curve because the exercise goes against what the course is teaching.

The course uses as one of its textbooks, Becoming a Contagious Christian: Communicating Your Faith in a Style that Fits You, which teaches that there are several ways of evangelizing referred to as "styles" and that there isn't only one acceptable way. Those styles are: Direct style, Intellectual style, Invitational style, and Serving style.

Then the course has students read an article that emphasizes one style (Direct, or perhaps Intellectual) and asks them to attempt to do so. The article gives the following statement for its rationale:

"We are dedicated to equipping people for evangelism, not because large numbers follow us, but because it is the command Jesus gave to His followers. We don’t take others with us for OJT because it’s convenient, comfortable or easy, but because it is the Biblically mandated, time-tested, and historically proven means of producing disciples." 

This runs counter to the teaching in the course that was previously laid down as foundational. 

This article pulls from Dr. D. James Kenedy's Evangelism Explosion material which is hung on four principles: 
1) Every Christian is to be a witness, 2) It is the responsibility of the Pastor to equip the saints, 3) Equipping is best done by on-the-job training, 4) Training soul winners is spiritual multiplication--and Scripture verses are given in support for each of these. 

OJT is one method. EE states it is the best method, which means it may not be the only one, but (in Kennedy's debateable opinion) it is the best method. I am not saying I disagree. I am just seeking to establish consistencies. 

I agree that everyone who comes in contact with Jesus Christ and has a conversion experience where they are forgiven of sins and receive the Holy Spirit, will be Christ's witness (Acts 1:8-9). Therefore, every Christian is a witness (I speak about the difference between a religious Christian and a true disciple here). Paul writes the Ephesians that God has given the people of Christ, his body, the Church, people to equip them for ministry: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastor-teachers (4:11-13). Jesus sends out his Jewish disciples into a Jewish area with specific instructions to preach the kingdom to only Jewish people in the way he has modeled but also with specific instructions on how: preach the kingdom, heal the sick, and cast out demons in my name. 

A walk through the book of Acts will show different methods are initiated when the disciples evangelize. There is Peter preaching, Peter with Cornelius, Philip with the Ethiopian eunuch, Saul/Paul and Jesus and later Ananias, Paul with Lydia and the Philippian jailer, Paul on Mars Hill, and a few more. None of these are exactly alike; there are principles that can be gleaned from each that are similar across the board. However, Paul changed his method, or his style, to meet the challenge of the people on Mars Hill he was speaking to so that "by some means I might save some." 

Maybe I am wrong in thinking that asking students to try a style that isn't there own or comfortable with runs counter to the training they are receiving. Maybe not.




Popular posts from this blog

Banning Influencers at Church?

 You might be getting The Pour Over into your inbox each day as I do. As I read one of the highlighted articles, Why are cafes, restaurants, and even towns banning influences ?  I thought of two things: A popular video game and the Church. The [Galactic Civ] video game action arena is space and utilizes exploring with several different tactics. One is cultural expansion deploying techniques for taking over the galaxy using mods to influence other traveling species with your culture and therefore "quietly" take over the galaxy and win the game. You could also win by buying up all of the other planets (economic takeover--think China?), or by hostile takeovers and warfare (think Russia?).  I like to use the cultural takeover mostly these days. The article lists the reasons for the ban, one is logistical (small-town shops cannot handle triple+ visitors due to a rise in popularity resulting in more harm than good). I imagined a small church of older people spiking due to a popular

Revelation's Whore as Today's Culture

  https://thehustle.co/originals/why-you-almost-never-see-a-clock-at-the-mall The word “whore” may have different definitions to some, but I want to use it as a woman who markets herself for the sole purpose of robbing men of their life for her own gain--whatever her “gain” is: monetary, lust, or otherwise. She is the reverse-consumer and profiteer at the same time, a vampiress, a luxurious drunk, functioning alcoholic. Her appeal is a marketing scheme based on not just years of study, but an exquisite composition of research and development where she is both scientist and evidence, psychologist and client--in an endless cycle and sinister feedback loop of trial and error, hypothesis and investigation, feeding and consuming. All the while tricking you into believing you are the main character. But it isn’t about you. You have entered her Nirvana constructed for you to “remain inside” her. Once her legs are wrapped around you, she is sure to suck your life away. And as titillating a

Who you going to call?

I had a coworker who was a very-likeable person, but seemed in competition with everyone. He was a funny guy, I'll give him that, but most of the time engaged in rather shallow conversations. He knew a little about everything, which caused him to have an opinion about . . . well, everything. And his wit made you want to listen. Most of the time, it is a fun, light-hearted space to work in. Likeable people, are just that: likeable. There are several people I have worked with over the years like this--very friendly, likeable, fairly easy to talk to, yet never really wanted to go deeper. In fact, if conversation turned that way, they became uncomfortable and either remained silent, tried to change the subject, or simply left the circle.  We all need someone we can go deep with. This is the kind of person you'd want to tell others you know or ask if they do. They are not the kind of person you'd call if your spouse ended up in the hospital, or your parent died, or your kid was

Family Time Videos