Todd, is something missing from this post?

[In Acts 17, Paul started with the people’s religious views and philosophies. In Acts 13 he started with Jewish history, and in Acts 14 he started with nature.]

EXACTLY, being prepared in-season and out-of-season means that you are ready to share the Gospel IN THE CULTURAL CONTEXT of the hearers. How do you do this? I think Paul did it, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, by being part of that community enough to understand what to say first. If he had started with nature in Acts 13 and with Jewish history in Acts 17, he might perhaps have “gotten it wrong.”

Unfortunately, many believe their method is the “only way” for all hearers and for all situations. Nonsense. For instance, confrontational “where-are-you-going-when-you-die” questions may, in some contexts, have their place. Not in any I frequent though.

I agree that we need to be sensitive to the context of the circumstances in how we enter into a conversation about salvation.

I’ve used the 10 Commandments deal, as well as others.

One thing I had to disagree with in the article, though.  He says:

“To share Christ, we have to go beyond formulas that fit on napkins. The Gospel is not a doodle. Isn’t God’s story of redemption and reconciliation for His creation bigger than what can fit on a napkin?”

In my opinion and experience, so many people think that getting to heaven is incredibly complicated - they feel they have to go through just the right rituals, have just the right lifestyle, grasp the right kind of theology, etc.  “Napkin” presentations are a great way to boil it down to the essentials: Sin separates us from God, Jesus makes it possible for us to be forgiven and united with Him - on earth and for eternity.

I’ve led many people to Christ by drawing out the Bridge Illustration (courtesy of the Navigators and modified by many, including Bill Hybels), and one of the most frequent comments I hear is “that is the most clear and understandable way I’ve ever seen to explain this.”

I think I understand Mr. Stetzer’s concern, and I agree with it.  The idea of redemption is too big to simply be a formula.  In fact, it’s beyond what we will be able to comprehend on earth, and maybe even in heaven. 

But we still need to be able to present the gospel in a concise manner, telling them just what they need to know in order to cross the line of faith (Hybel’s term) in Christ.

I was thrilled by the graph showing that one in five think daily about where they’re going to spend eternity.  This would probably be those fields that are ripe for harvest!

Brian

Leonard,

Thanks again for your perspective.

My respect for you continues to grow.

Brian

Leonard, thanks for the insights. Your conversational approach is, I think, quite healthy.
I would add that as long as we think Christianity is about going to heaven when you die, it’s not even worth talking about it. Not to diss the ‘4 spiritual laws’ or the ‘bridge diagram’, but Christianity is about nothing less than New Creation, God putting the world to rights at long last, and this is only secondarily about post-mortem life. The story of the Creator calling a people to reveal him to the world is a long story, and probably can’t be told in one sitting. So we have to be comfortable taking it one piece at a time. The content of individual conversations will have to be determined ‘on the fly’ by the guidance of the Spirit. There will be a time for basic exposition (this is what we believe, this is how we are called to live, etc.), there will be a time for warning (’the wage of sin is death’, etc.), and there will be a time for silence (e.g. if you’re being teasingly provoked, barking out arguments for the resurrection may only hurt your witness--again, it all depends on the context).
But I would argue that the most convincing argument for the truth of Christianity, and consequently the thing that is most likely to ‘convert’ people, is a faithful community witness. When the Church is what the Church is supposed to be (the brotherhood of saints, the community under God’s sovereign rule, a manifestation of the Kingdom, a non-violent commune where there is no one in material need, etc.), and when the conversations of individuals flow out of that communal identity, then ‘evangelism’ is in its proper context and it can bear the most fruit.
My two cents,
-Daniel-

I try to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit as I listen to the person with whom I am speaking, I am just glad that their are a lot of others sharing their faith it is a real encouragement.  I have listened to some CD’s by Ray Comfort and the “Way of the Master” and he doesn’t seem to put to much emphasis on answering peoples questions [I have learned a lot from the Way of the Master, good things] But shouldn’t we be ready to answer peoples questions and not ignore them ? also is it me or are there more and more Atheist around these days, how do you get around long discussions about evolution and if there really is a God and get right to the meat of the Gospel with someone that you briefly meet? Have any of you had any success going door to door witnessing? I guess I am in “learning Mode” today, Thanks

We must all remember that we are responsible to the Lord to preach HIS Gospel message and not our “version” of it.  If we are faithful to do that then we can expect the same reactions from the hearers that Jesus, John the Baptist, Paul, Peter, John, as well as all the prophets of the Old Testament received.  I think that too many times we try to soft sell the message so that people will like us or like Jesus.  Jesus never did this.  He was nearly thrown from a cliff for telling people about their sins.  I am not saying that we go out to intentionally offend people to the point of wrath but we must not compromise the message. 

Ray and Kirk’s ministry has brought back the biblical method of using the Law to expose to the proud heart that their sins are against God and grace to the humble heart.  I have used this biblical method for the last 4 years and I have seen the effect it has on the proud and humble heart.  We must always remember that it is God’s job to save them and our job to tell them.  The parable of the sower shows us that roughly only 25% of the time does it fall on good ground and that ground must be prepared by the Law because no one can deny the conscience.

If the parable of the sower is to be used as a measurement then only a stupid farmer expects 25% of his sowing to be fruitful.  A smart farmer would aim much higher.  The 25% is not a biblical number in as much as there are 4 descriptions.  Be careful not to turn that parable into a measuring stick for fruitful ministry.  Wise farmers (sowers) work the soil long before the seeds enter in order to insure more fruit. 

Romans 2:4 reminds us not to think to little of or take to lightly the kindness or goodness of God since it is his kindness that draws us to repent.  I think you can speak about heaven, hell, sin, judgment, righteousness, death to self and the likes very well without offending the majority of people. 

To measure fruitfulness by the offenses we cause with the Gospel is not healthy.  To measure fruitfulness by the lives changed is healthy.  To avoid all offenses at all cost is not healthy.  To wear them as a badge of commitment is not healthy.  I am not sure of the fruitfulness of WOTM.  I have watched people whose hearts were open to a conversation about God be harmed unnecessarily by the approach.  Some people Jesus simply forgave.  When a method wears as a badge of honor the verses about offense and blames consistently the offended people as not being humble, I might be suspicious about the method.  Once I recall Jesus clicking off the commandments as a way to open the door, he also healed, forgave, fed people, spoke about the kingdom, raised the dead, ate with sinners…

What I see Jesus doing in the Gospels was as follows.  Jesus often saw soil that could support a growing fruitful seed and recognized that soil was filled with rocks of doubt and pressure.  He could see the soil was overrun with weeds of fear and greed or pride.  He would then love and care for people in such a way as to remove the rocks and weeds before planting the seed.  For me, sharing Christ is always about pulling weeds and planting seeds.

Chris.

matt 4: 18-21. Jesus calls Simon and Andrew. Just says “Come Follow Me”. Do they know about the message of “Repent and turn to God?” Yes, it’s been preached in their area, But Jesus isn’t recorded as repeating it yet again here.

Matt 8: 1-4, Jesus heals the man with leprosy, and there is no recorded words calling the man to repentance. No doubt this man is also already aware of that message, as so many are today. (Throughout Matthew, Jesus is recorded as healing person after person without referring to the necessity of repentance.)

My favorite is John 4, where Jesus gives nothing but the “good” part of the good news for quite a while in the conversation, until about half-way through. he does not start the same way that Kirk and Ray insist he must, and it is still effective. (Once again, I never said the WOTM method wasn’t biblical, only that it is not the ONLY biblical method.)

In Acts 8, Philip’s encounter with the Ethiopian eunuch does not record a specific mention of repentance being preached. Again, no doubt, the eunuch already knew about this. It may have either came up in conversation or not, but the conversation STARTS with a “common ground” discussion of the passage the eunuch is reading.

Paul often talks about repentance in the middle of or at the END of the message… and my point again is, he finds common ground as a starting point, respecting the person he’s speaking to, and in some cases even quoting their own pagan poets (kinda like quoting a song by a current musical artist, isn’t it...)

Am I saying the Gospel is complete without the message of repentance? I am not. I am saying, again, that perhaps WOTM’s method is not the ONLY viable biblical method.

And now I go to celebrate a RARE Sunday off…

Blessings,
Peter