Let Evangelism Take Care of Itself
The more time I spend in church ministry, the more frustrated I get with traditional approaches to evangelism which emphasize making a decision...NOW! In my post about our Christ Zombies concerts a few weeks ago, I noted that seven teens prayed to receive Christ. That's wonderful, but I also know that most of those kids are not plugged into any Christian community and that decision will likely be meaningless six months from now. However, two of those teens attended our youth group for several months before they made their decisions. I am far more optimistic about them because their decision was informed by the witness of lived faith which they desired for themselves.
Last week, a young woman who has been part of our church for the last year or so prayed to receive Christ. Two weeks ago, a couple that has been hanging around for a while began asking questions about what it means to be "saved" or "born again". My conviction is that the gospel does not usually have to be forced upon someone. As they are invited into a Christ-centered community of love and faith, the gospel is experienced and people come to faith quite naturally. I would much rather trust the Holy Spirit's work in people's lives than my own ability to articulate the gospel
The big question, however, is how do we make our churches places where the gospel is lived and where people are given time to process their faith without being pressured to decide on the spot whether or not they will decide to follow Jesus? In other words, how do we make our churches safe places for people to ask questions, make friends, make mistakes, and eventually come to faith?
posted by Corey @ 9:49 AM
14 comments
14 Comments:
A few comments:
Evangelism is a word that means to proclaim. Evangelism does not happen unless one proclaims the Word. While it is important to live a life of love before people, and even to do good works and nice things for others, it must be balanced with the proclamation.
We are not here to look for a decision, though we should always call for one. We are called as disciples to plant seeds. The way that we plant seeds varies greatly, but the proclamation of the truth is necessary "How will they know if no one preaches to them?"
The world is full of nice people that do nice things for others. Bill Gates gives billions to charities that help people. So does Warren Buffet. So does Oprah. Will those nice things get the giver or the recipient any closer to heaven? Nope. It is the preaching of the law to the proud and Grace to the humble that sees conversion happen.
But, God gives the increase. It is God who draws people and it is he who begins and finishes the work. He has given us the privilege and command to work side by side with Him.
I want to have another discussion with you about what it means to receive or accept Christ. Another post, perhaps.
Pastorboy,
Several thoughts...
First, I do not disagree that proclamation is an important part of the receiving of the gospel. Where I disagree with you is that I think in order for the gospel to be effective, it must have a context. The gospel is more than simply a set of beliefs that must be affirmed or rejected. It must be proclaimed within the context of a loving, serving, Spirit-filled, Christ-centered community. Apart from a context, you have simply a disembodied message that doesn't have any point of reference for the person hearing it.
Second, the gospel is bigger than "humble yourself, repent of your sins, trust Jesus, and you get forgiven and go to heaven." Our CMA doctrine declares that the gospel is Jesus as our Savior, Sanctifier, Healer, and Coming King. If we only emphasize Jesus as saving us from our sins, we do a grave injustice to Jesus' own teaching on the Gospel of the Kingdom. The gospel is good news for this life, not just the next.
Third, the "law to the proud and grace to the humble" perspective of Jesus' teaching sounds great in theory, but in practice there is something lacking. I've spent time with Todd Friel, I've watched your video presentations, and I've seen others practicing this method. The problem is that everyone I have seen using this method assumes that the person they're talking to is one of the proud. They ALWAYS start with the law and NEVER offer grace. In fact, I would argue with the definition of "the proud" in Jesus' ministry. The proud are always the religious proud...the ones who think they have all of the answers. The proud that Jesus confronts with the law were the people who thought they were being saved by the law and Jesus demonstrated just how far they had yet to go. I think that the proud in our culture are often the religious proud as well...the people who think they have all of the answers but miss the heart of love, grace and mercy that Jesus lived and proclaimed.
Thanks for the interaction!
I would agree with the context being incredibly important for the Gospel. I think that the way the Gospel was understood in Jesus' time and how it is understood in Evangelicalism today is sometimes a shift away from it's original intent and thrust. Thanks for the post.
First, I do not disagree that proclamation is an important part of the receiving of the gospel. Where I disagree with you is that I think in order for the gospel to be effective, it must have a context. The gospel is more than simply a set of beliefs that must be affirmed or rejected. It must be proclaimed within the context of a loving, serving, Spirit-filled, Christ-centered community. Apart from a context, you have simply a disembodied message that doesn't have any point of reference for the person hearing it."
I disagree. It does need to have a context, but that context can be created by creating a need that most people, particularly those in this culture (America)dont think they have. Many people that I interact with do not believe that they even have a need, that a belief that at some point that God will forgive them. In other words, if they are good enough, eventually they will go to heaven. This can manifest itself in any denomination or religion. The beauty of being a seed planter is that you get to a point where you can recognize the soil just by performing a few tests. When I ask a question like 'what do you think happens when you die' or 'do you think that you are a good person' these are simply diagnostic tests. By the way, I have yet to have anyone answer me that he or she feels that they are a bad person- in other words- a sinner that needs salvation. Most people do not realize they need a savior because they do not realize they have sinned.
I think that the church is a place that should be a loving community where Christians at all levels of their walk should interact in love, ask questions, get taught from the Word, and develop into fully formed followers of Jesus Christ. I struggle with the idea that Church should be a place where one who has not started his faith journey should feel very comfortable. When we make church human sensitive, all to often we compromise the message. This is what I have observed in the emergent and seeker sensitive movement.
"Second, the gospel is bigger than "humble yourself, repent of your sins, trust Jesus, and you get forgiven and go to heaven." Our CMA doctrine declares that the gospel is Jesus as our Savior, Sanctifier, Healer, and Coming King. If we only emphasize Jesus as saving us from our sins, we do a grave injustice to Jesus' own teaching on the Gospel of the Kingdom. The gospel is good news for this life, not just the next."
I agree wholeheartedly, but the starting point is Jesus as Savior for a purpose; Jesus is the sanctifier, healer, and coming King for those who have entered into a faith based relationship with Him! Jesus came to save man from our sins, this is a decision that is made on a personal basis, it is not universal, people must be made aware of their need of Jesus as Savior before they can enter into the fourfold Gospel.
"The problem is that everyone I have seen using this method assumes that the person they're talking to is one of the proud. They ALWAYS start with the law and NEVER offer grace".
That may be what you have observed, but I believe that grace only really makes sense when people know that they have a need. I have done, as Peter did at Pentecost, and Jesus did with the adulterous woman, presented the gospel when it was clear that the person I was speaking with was clearly aware of their need; not just of a Savior for their most pressing need, but for their entire condition; a sinner who would be lost but for the grace of the Savior. The cross is foolishness to one who has no awareness of their state before God.
I proclaim the Gospel, not because I have some perverse need to be right and to condemn others, no, I proclaim it because Jesus' love compels me to. Woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel.
I don't think we are far from agreeing, And by the way I think I have probably worked with a number of those kids you are working with now...I was at Treehouse in Chaska for two years...but these kids need more than someone who loves them and cares about them. They need Jesus.
Erik - Thanks!
pastorboy - We probably do know some of the same people. We have a great relationship with Treehouse and have a number of current students and recent graduates attending church. In fact, the young woman who received Christ and was baptized last week was a recent Treehouse grad. It's a great program.
Regarding your comments, just a couple of responses...I know you're kind of anti-emergent and all, but lumping "seeker sensitive" and "emergent" into the same camp is really pretty disingenuous. They're really opposite ends of the spectrum. Broadly speaking, seeker sensitive churches tend to boil down the gospel to the lowest common denominator and make things as comfortable as possible in the process. All of the emergent people I've been around call people to intensely follow Jesus as disciples. You might not like some of the theological questions they ask, but seeker sensitive they are not.
Second, you spend a lot of time talking about people getting "saved" and getting into heaven, which surprisingly Jesus spends very little time doing. In describing his reason for coming to earth, he says,
"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
You can't overspiritualize this and say that it is just about people getting their sins forgiven. You can't say that healing and the coming kingdom are only byproducts of receiving Jesus as Savior. Much of the time, Jesus healed first and dealt with sins later, if at all.
You regularly minimize the efforts of people who "do nice things for others" by saying that those nice things don't get people any closer to heaven. Frankly, I don't see Jesus being terribly concerned about getting people into heaven. He wanted to get people into the Kingdom and to get the Kingdom into them. Release of the oppressed, justice for the downtrodden, food for the hungry, visits to the prisoners, and healing for the sick are the ways that he most often chose to go about it. He told his disciples to do the same thing:
"When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick."
It doesn't say anything there about getting people into heaven or even forgiving their sins. Read the parable of the sheep and the goats again and tell me that those loving acts are only secondary to getting people saved.
All I would say in response is yeah!
But what is the kingdom of heaven? What were they supposed to preach?
And why did Jesus Die? Was it because of the blind, the sick and the lame? No, the greatest problem that man has, and the root of all these imperfections was SIN. Jesus' death did do so much more than to purchase entrance into the kingdom of God, which begins on this earth and continues after this old physical body dies. He died that we might be born again!
I didn't lump the emergent church together with seeker sensitive; I was simply saying what I thought church was. I know that they are nowhere near each other. The main problem I have with emergent is their changing around of the Gospel to say what you are starting to say, that Jesus' death was not about justification, that the impact of Jesus' death was universal,so don't worry about preaching the forgiveness of sins, just feed, heal, and clothe them ; that meeting people's earthly needs outweighs the proclamation of the Gospel.
What do you do with the paralytic and others who Jesus began the conversation with addressing their spiritual needs? Your sins are forgiven you? Go your way and sin no more? (to the adulterous)?
What about John Chapter 4 where Jesus lovingly but firmly talks to the Samaritan woman, revealing her greatest need? John 3 where he tells Nicodemus "ye MUST be born again?"
And the reason we are here, Jesus says, it to follow Him in obedience to His Word. Matthew 28:18-20- his last command? Acts 1:8? There is nothing in there about the healing and sight for the blind. We are called to make disciples, that do those things that Jesus called us to do as a part of total ministry. Sure, healing can come before salvation, but it is a spiritual reality as is sanctification after we have been born again- which, by the way, we will not enter this kingdom of God unless we are born again.
And by the way, I do love emergent pastors- like Mark Driscoll. He proves you can ask these kind of questions without totally departing from what the Bible teaches.
There is a biblical balance between helping people with their physical needs and their spiritual ones. I believe that the Bible teaches that both are important, but our need to be born again outweighs our need to be fed, healed, and clothed.
One helps us here only, the other brings us into the kingdom of God. One follows the other; if we are born again we love one another and we are passionate about completing Christ's command.
Check it out...haha,
Matthew 10:22
All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.
The Bible is clear that their is a certain means to our salvation. We have to stand firm until the end to receive this. So it is evident that their has to be work done in our hearts and live before we can be saved. Because a Non-Believer would not stand strong but rather he would join his own. This is re-iterated in 24:13.
The Bible is also clear that not only are we saved through Jesus' death, we are also saved through his life.
Romans 5:10
For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!
The bible is clear that we are called to make our salvation clear through a lifestyle. 1 Peter 1, 2 Peter 1. 1 Peter 1:2, says our salvation will be made complete by our obedience.
It says in:
Hebrews 5:8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him.
Clearly, it is biblical that God is at work in those who are saved, and there is not set time in which we are saved. So we as Christians must allow God to do his work, in his time.
We as Christians are called to love. We can help in the sanctification of those around us by love. Love changes hearts, hearts of the wicked, hearts that are hard, hearts that are blind.
1 Peter 4:8
Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.
B.T.W-Driscoll has been very harsh on Emergent. Especially on authors like McLaren, and Rob Bell(who isn't emergent, but in bunched in it)
Patorboy- Obviously there is no disagreement that salvation is important or valued in Corey's church, or there would be NO decisions for Christ. There is definitely a message of salvation and if you really like the term "to be born again." To question this is to assume that all emergent pastors or churches are the same and also, I'm pretty sure that most churches and pastors that would associate themselves with "emergent" would also be in an uproar to hear this accusation. Universalism is not being preached here. Rather, that there is so much more to relationship than randomly asking someone off the street if they are a bad person. I know that even myself, a sincere follower of Jesus would not honestly say that I'm a bad person to such an offensive question from someone who does not know me and assumes that I am some pagan filled with leprosy of the heart. Of course you have never had someone admit that to you on the street- in such an inappropriate place, when you had done nothing to show these people that you are not like so many hypocritical Christians that they either know or here about in the news, who say one thing and do another. One thing I would love to know- if you met once or twice a week with someone you met on the street, laughing with them, being willing to listen to their stories, life, celebrate, cry with them, for four weeks and then you asked them, "Are you a bad person?" would you get a more honest answer? I don't think it is that these people don't know they are bad people. I think they know and they are ashamed and they are not going to tell someone they think might judge them. So get to know them, then ask. This is the point I think Corey is trying to make.
Mike, And Anonomys,
I don't ask if they are a bad person, I ask if they feel that they are a good person. It is a great conversation starter.
Dude, you are wrong about the emergent movement! Doug Pagitt just said on national radio that hell and heaven do not exist, that a good buddhist and muslim will be forgiven by God and welcomed into his kingdom, which is not heaven but a diiferent place. Brian McLaren in his new book questions whether or not Jesus' death was really for justification. Rob Bell (not an emergent?!) says that Jesus spoke about hell only in the context of the rich, and that we are saved by doing good works for the poor! It does not look like Corey is a true emergent; my concern for all these younger pastors is that they don't get sucked in by the deception in their passion to try something new. I am emergent (like Mark Driscoll) in that I believe we need to go back to biblical Christianity displayed in the Book of Acts, relying on the Holy Spirit as we go out and preach the Gospel to every creature.
I don't doubt Corey's work or his motives. He has a clear love for these people he is ministering to. I disagree that a church building is a place for pagans and believers to interact, because the place of the church is to minister to one another (brothers in Christ) to equip them and release them to do the work of discipling. When the church has a blend of non-believers and believers, I argue that the believers do not get what they need and the non-believers are lured into a false sense of comfort, especially in places where words like 'hell' 'repentance' and 'born again' are eschewed.
Please hear my heart, which I think you are missing. I love people. I see lost people and am moved by passion and compassion to see them in a relationship with Christ. We may disagree on the method, but I believe our passion is the same. I believe that the church is not the place where evangelism is done, rather, it should be the place where equipping is done. The place where these kids can be loved on, and people should experience the love of Christ from believers is in the coffee shops, the concert halls, the football games, the homes, the places outside the walls of church. This is the place where questions can best be answered and the life of Christ can best be displayed.
Thanks for the interaction pastorboy, Mike, and anonymous...
pastorboy, I get what you're saying. I disagree that the church cannot or should not be a place where evangelism takes place, but I understand your struggle with it. For me, I evangelize through discipleship because I believe the Holy Spirit's process of transforming a person's heart happens even before a salvation event has occurred. But we can agree to disagree on that.
As far as your list of emergent people that are in theological error...can you document where they said those things? Particularly the Doug Pagitt comment as I know him and don't believe that is what he meant.
http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2638/Todd_Friel
Is where Doug Pagitt was interviewed by Todd Friel
On one of my blogs, www.thedowngrade.blogspot.com documents comments from books, speeches, and interviews by these pastors.
I don't think questioning and struggling are bad, I think that it is natural to do so. It is just unfortunate that some of these guys are arriving at non-biblical and anti-biblical conclusions. Be careful! question, but always come back to the scripture.
sorry...the blog is www.thedowngrade2007.blogspot.com
pastorboy -
I really do not want to engage you on the topic of the emergent church. You clearly have your mind made up and I am also not going to be convinced. Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones are friends of mine and I have seen the fruit of their faith in the lives and ministry. Brian McLaren and Rob Bell are two of the most humble, genuine, honest, and faithful followers of Jesus that I have ever read, yet those with very narrow (and significantly unbiblical) interpretations of orthodoxy (like Todd Friel) will not even be able to hear what they are saying.
Corey,
Don't engage me, thats fine, but PLEASE engage the Bible. Not everyone goes to heaven! Heaven and hell DO exist! The Bible IS true! We CAN understand it! Jesus IS the ONLY way the ONLY truth and the ONLY life. NO MAN (not a good buddhist, muslim, Jew, mormon, or even 'christian emergent' or 'christian orthodox' gets to the Father but by HIM. The path that these guys have gone down is counter that. Paul said that if any man preaches a different Gospel, let him be DAMNED. Jude commands us to contend earnestly for the faith that was entrusted us!
You asked me to document these things, I did, I am just curious to hear your response! Is their fruit good fruit, for the Glory of God, or is it good fruit for a humanist mind? Judge according to the truth of the scripture. That is all I pray for you and the emergents movement-that they ask questions and have a conversation, but at the end I pray that they come to the Bible and receive their answer from the Holy Spirit of God.
Post a Comment
<< Home