My personal experience of evangelism

[Paprika]

Many Christians have a warped conception of the gospel which naturally affects their evangelism.

It was also here that I learned that many of the programs of the church were fraudulent. They CLAIMED to be doing one thing but were all fundamentally aimed at evangelism. People were considered 'targets' and 'scalps'. It had as much integrity as selling insurance or used cars.

Sure enough, at Christmas I overheard my parents telling the same story to their religious relatives and they included a lot more bits to the story than what they'd told me, and sure enough, the motivations of the guy doing this were primarily about evangelism. Helping poor people out of debt was apparently a useful tool for winning souls for Christ.

My guess would be that Western conceptualisations of a religious/public space distinction (the generalisation of church-state separation) leads to an implicit axiom that any Christian action in the public space must be geared towards evangelism; the people who hold this axiom thus will organise programmes to help the community but with the help as a means to 'evangelism' rather than an end. It is all too easy to justify such 'evangelism' in terms of the good of those preached at when the real motivation is self-exaltation.

This is NOT a thread I'd like to see resolve along familiar lines of us vs them.

Apologetics 301 is a dangerous place for such threads.

[Spartacus]

A paradox: Catholic charitable organizations, as opposed to evangelical ones, don't tie their help to proselytization efforts, but, if I bring that up, am I proselytizing?

[Juvenal]

It's apparently a lose-lose for Christians, then.

If they do something that actually helps people in their everyday lives, then they're being deceptive because they have 'other motives'.

If they don't do anything very practical, just try to tell people about Jesus, then they're just offering 'pie in the sky when you die'.

Isn't it at all possible that at least some Christians both want to help people in their present lives, and (hopefully) help them know Jesus, who, Christians believe, is wonderful, loving, and our only way to fully full life?

"Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words." — Francis of Assissi?

I'm not sure about the author. I am sure words are not necessary. If Christianity works for you, providing you with a "fully full" life, it'll be obvious to people around you.

Meanwhile, atheists apparently get a free pass, and can live as selfishly as they like. Or not.

True enough, except for the "atheists" part.

I've seen the Civics forum here at TWeb. It's filled with Christians preaching the gospel of cheaper burgers at the expense of the counter help, and non-Christians arguing otherwise. For the most part, that is ... Sam excepted, of course ... not that that shelters him from flak from his fellow adherents.

In ten years on TWeb, the only person I've ever seen in Civics who had personally started and run a homeless shelter was Christina. Yeah, she's an atheist.

Some folks want to think running a soup kitchen or volunteering at the VA are virtues exclusive to their faith, going so far as to exclude non-adherents from their charitable ministries. That's a worst case, but it does happen. There are other reasons given, but the end result is the same.

In the US, more often, you're just made to feel unwelcome if you show up to help. There are notable exceptions, like Habitat for Humanity, but for the most part, we're restricted to financial contributions to faceless bureaucracies like the United Way. Arguably more efficient than religious charities — Catholic Charities and The Salvation Army are notable exceptions — but not especially satisfying on a personal level.

As ever, Jesse

[Juvenal]

A paradox: Catholic charitable organizations, as opposed to evangelical ones, don't tie their help to proselytization efforts, but, if I bring that up, am I proselytizing?

There's a way around that. And, we still have cookies.

[Spartacus]

There's a way around that. And, we still have cookies.

Now, see, you proselytized right there

[shunyadragon]

A paradox: Catholic charitable organizations, as opposed to evangelical ones, don't tie their help to proselytization efforts, but, if I bring that up, am I proselytizing?

This is a paradox within a paradox, because historically the way the Roman Church grew is through establishing their missions with charitable services, which is simply another way or proselytizing. Careful how one defines proselytizing, because in and of itself it is not bad, but the methods can surely be bad, and at times the the Roman Church has used bad methods of proselytizing.

[Cow Poke]

It's apparently a lose-lose for Christians, then.

If they do something that actually helps people in their everyday lives, then they're being deceptive because they have 'other motives'.

If they don't do anything very practical, just try to tell people about Jesus, then they're just offering 'pie in the sky when you die'.

Isn't it at all possible that at least some Christians both want to help people in their present lives, and (hopefully) help them know Jesus, who, Christians believe, is wonderful, loving, and our only way to fully full life?

In my early years, I was what I guess you could call a hard core evangelistic Christian. Then, about 1975-ish, I was working in a medical clinic in Haiti, and saw a sign over the blackboard in the school room at our orphanage that said "a hungry stomach has no ears". (That may be attributed to somebody famous, I don't know, but it really had an impact on me) It was WHY we were feeding the orphans and teaching them in school and loving them and tending to their physical needs. Nobody pretended that our ultimate goal was not to win them to Jesus, but we fully understood that Jesus met people at the point of their need. It changed things.

Since then, I have been involved in lots of ministry things, and I fully admit that the ultimate goal is evangelism, but in God's time. Ministering to needs first, sharing the Gospel in the power of the Holy Spirit, leaving the results to God. It has always worked really well that way.

I'm amazed, from time to time, how people jump to the conclusion that because I'm a conservative Christian -- well, it's like one of the posters here said... pretty much accusing me of an over-evangelistic zeal and not caring about the needs of people, feeding the hungry, etc. I'll admit that often, conservative Christians seem isolated from "the social gospel", and may even tend to criticize it. But I can assure you that a lot of us see these things as inseparable.

I am involved in ministry to the poor in a whole bunch of ways. Is my ultimate goal "evangelism". Unashamedly, I admit, yes, it is. For, what kind of Christian would I be to tend to the immediate but temporal needs of people in this life, and neglect their eternal destiny?

I have always been taught "tell them about Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit, leaving the results to God".

[shunyadragon]

Subtitled: 'And why I don't like it.'

In my twenties I was teaching in a remote country town where I met my wife (who was a Christian). She wasn't a 'beat you over the head' kind of Christian. You knew it was her faith and she answered your questions. I was really into CS Lewis, and began over sometime to accept more and more of Christianity. I had a conversion experience on my own, and since it's intensely personal, I won't bore you with the details. Some time later we were married and both looked for ways to 'serve the Lord' more directly. I accepted a job in a Christian school in Melbourne. (Yes I know, I was never REALLY a Christian because I'm not one now.)

That didn't last long. The school was involved in a bitter internal dispute over some philosophy as to the extent Creation could be another revelation of God. Great fun. Committed Christians were tearing each other down left and right and conspiring in cadres to oust everybody else.

I resigned and we came back to teach in state schools.

We attended a local Baptist church and were very active within it. A lovely lady (since passed) was an elder and wanted very much to do the best she could for God. She used a program called 'Evangelism Explosion' and we all learnt how to 'win' souls, memorising our verses and arguments. We'd go to local families and run through our spiel and harangue people in their own homes. I remember with shame the perplexed look on most people's faces as we interrupted their precious night family time.

Over time, I got more into the 'charismatic' side of things. We joined an Assembly of God church and I rose to be a worship leader. I can vividly remember how one elder told he just KNEW I was leading by the Spirit because he got goosebumps whenever I lead the music. It was here I learned how easy it was to manipulate the feelings of the congregation. In fact, we were encouraged to do so. I was good at it. We always had an alter appeal and I watched hundreds of people whipped up into an easy emotionalism come forward. It was also here that I learned that many of the programs of the church were fraudulent. They CLAIMED to be doing one thing but were all fundamentally aimed at evangelism. People were considered 'targets' and 'scalps'. It had as much integrity as selling insurance or used cars.

I have seen this pattern repeated over and over again in various churches and organisations. Ministry X seems a good and charitable thing to do, but remember our REAL aim (which we won't tell the suckers) is to 'win' them for Jesus so I can get a merit badge in heaven.

I read and thought (yes, and prayed) more and more growing more and more dissatisfied with the dishonesty and hard sell of organised Christianity. So after much anguish I left. I no longer consider myself a Christian and none of you consider me one either.

I despise evangelism. To me it is a sign of dishonesty and manipulation. It's almost always simple minded. It demeans the Other, because it so hardly ever listens to the life experience the other person has.

The Jews (who serve the same God) have an entirely different approach. When you say to them you're considering becoming a Jew they usually respond 'Why on earth would you want to do that?' Catholics aren't bad either. They simply can't believe you'd like to be a member of their flawed club. I'm attracted to both because of that.

It would be a cheap throwaway line to say I left Christianity because of the bad behaviour of a few people. I didn't. I have deep theological and philosophical objections to much of Christian belief and practice. But I will admit to feeling vindicated on a regular basis.

This is of course a common tragedy that can be manifest in different religions and faiths over the eons, and there are of course worse, but I believe that the search for one's faith must go deeper then the human frailty or their methods of proselytizing on the surface. Example, just because you see favor in the methods you experience among the Jews does not translate to the fundamental soundness of their spiritual message for humanity. I personally believe that the Jews do not propose a message of salvation nor guidance for ALL of humanity. Just because the methods of proselytizing you witnessed of the evangelicals, does not in and of itself, does not determine the truthfulness of the religious message they share. Though the witness of how those that believe differently in general does reflect on how the guidance from scripture may be translated to personal acts in one's life.

I chose a more deeper and broader search into the theology and philosophy of the nature of humanity being human in the diversity and universal of our history and the nature of our physical existence through science, because here lies the real objective witness of whatever underlies the Source of everything which is possibly natural or Divine. Claims of Truth from the perspective of fallible humans could hardly come up with one belief that is the one Truth above all others.

The search for the universal and truth is more illusive then most claim. It is likely if the shoes feel comfortable and fit, they are not the universal shoes for the hard climb to the middle mountain.

[whag]

In my early years, I was what I guess you could call a hard core evangelistic Christian. Then, about 1975-ish, I was working in a medical clinic in Haiti, and saw a sign over the blackboard in the school room at our orphanage that said "a hungry stomach has no ears". (That may be attributed to somebody famous, I don't know, but it really had an impact on me) It was WHY we were feeding the orphans and teaching them in school and loving them and tending to their physical needs. Nobody pretended that our ultimate goal was not to win them to Jesus, but we fully understood that Jesus met people at the point of their need. It changed things.

Since then, I have been involved in lots of ministry things, and I fully admit that the ultimate goal is evangelism, but in God's time. Ministering to needs first, sharing the Gospel in the power of the Holy Spirit, leaving the results to God. It has always worked really well that way.

I'm amazed, from time to time, how people jump to the conclusion that because I'm a conservative Christian -- well, it's like one of the posters here said... pretty much accusing me of an over-evangelistic zeal and not caring about the needs of people, feeding the hungry, etc. I'll admit that often, conservative Christians seem isolated from "the social gospel", and may even tend to criticize it. But I can assure you that a lot of us see these things as inseparable.

I am involved in ministry to the poor in a whole bunch of ways. Is my ultimate goal "evangelism". Unashamedly, I admit, yes, it is. For, what kind of Christian would I be to tend to the immediate but temporal needs of people in this life, and neglect their eternal destiny?

I have always been taught "tell them about Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit, leaving the results to God".

The problem is the obligatory aspect of the gospel that is easily misunderstood. If you merely let your good works be the goal and barely mention the tropes of Christianity at all, is that ultimately a help or a hindrance to the kingdom? I'd wager that this approach is more demonstrative of faith then one with an explicit pedagogical end goal, which casts suspicion on your motive just like any explicit proselytic goal by ANY religion, from Scientology to Mormonism, casts suspicion. It would seem God would be more honoring of the subtle approach.

[Catholicity]

Subtitled: 'And why I don't like it.'

In my twenties I was teaching in a remote country town where I met my wife (who was a Christian). She wasn't a 'beat you over the head' kind of Christian. You knew it was her faith and she answered your questions. I was really into CS Lewis, and began over sometime to accept more and more of Christianity. I had a conversion experience on my own, and since it's intensely personal, I won't bore you with the details. Some time later we were married and both looked for ways to 'serve the Lord' more directly. I accepted a job in a Christian school in Melbourne. (Yes I know, I was never REALLY a Christian because I'm not one now.)

That didn't last long. The school was involved in a bitter internal dispute over some philosophy as to the extent Creation could be another revelation of God. Great fun. Committed Christians were tearing each other down left and right and conspiring in cadres to oust everybody else.

I resigned and we came back to teach in state schools.

We attended a local Baptist church and were very active within it. A lovely lady (since passed) was an elder and wanted very much to do the best she could for God. She used a program called 'Evangelism Explosion' and we all learnt how to 'win' souls, memorising our verses and arguments. We'd go to local families and run through our spiel and harangue people in their own homes. I remember with shame the perplexed look on most people's faces as we interrupted their precious night family time.

Over time, I got more into the 'charismatic' side of things. We joined an Assembly of God church and I rose to be a worship leader. I can vividly remember how one elder told he just KNEW I was leading by the Spirit because he got goosebumps whenever I lead the music. It was here I learned how easy it was to manipulate the feelings of the congregation. In fact, we were encouraged to do so. I was good at it. We always had an alter appeal and I watched hundreds of people whipped up into an easy emotionalism come forward. It was also here that I learned that many of the programs of the church were fraudulent. They CLAIMED to be doing one thing but were all fundamentally aimed at evangelism. People were considered 'targets' and 'scalps'. It had as much integrity as selling insurance or used cars.

I have seen this pattern repeated over and over again in various churches and organisations. Ministry X seems a good and charitable thing to do, but remember our REAL aim (which we won't tell the suckers) is to 'win' them for Jesus so I can get a merit badge in heaven.

I read and thought (yes, and prayed) more and more growing more and more dissatisfied with the dishonesty and hard sell of organised Christianity. So after much anguish I left. I no longer consider myself a Christian and none of you consider me one either.

I despise evangelism. To me it is a sign of dishonesty and manipulation. It's almost always simple minded. It demeans the Other, because it so hardly ever listens to the life experience the other person has.

The Jews (who serve the same God) have an entirely different approach. When you say to them you're considering becoming a Jew they usually respond 'Why on earth would you want to do that?' Catholics aren't bad either. They simply can't believe you'd like to be a member of their flawed club. I'm attracted to both because of that.

It would be a cheap throwaway line to say I left Christianity because of the bad behaviour of a few people. I didn't. I have deep theological and philosophical objections to much of Christian belief and practice. But I will admit to feeling vindicated on a regular basis.

The kind of Christianity you left is the kind I personally ran away from..... Really far away from. I wrote about some of my experience in a private journal. I left that part of the church and I won't go back. I did become Catholic but for personal reasons I am not there either. I am a Christian but far from evangelical.I think it was uld be appropriate t point out that I would rather missionize by " being and acting" like Jesus to someone else rather than just telling them. Simple words are meaningless to most people. My desire to win people for Jesus isn't really there either but I would rather talk to those who want to listen and do nice things for those who need it.

[Cow Poke]

Probably one of the most interesting "evangelistic efforts" we were involved in didn't even start out as an evangelist effort at all.

Our Church was on a main highway, and I noticed that, on the Holidays, there was nearly bumper to bumper high speed traffic, people traveling from Houston to Waco. I remembered when I was a kid that local CB clubs ("REACT"?) would set up rest stops on the side of the road and offer free coffee.

I proposed that to our Church. We bought a 10x20 awning, and set it up out in front of the Church, with signs 1 and 2 miles down the road announcing "FREE COFFEE". We would sit out there and "fellowship" until somebody would pull over for a cup of coffee, or just to stretch their legs in a safe environment. We figured "if it works, fine, if not, no big loss".

It worked. We were amazed at how many people stopped. Then we were REALLY amazed at how much "ministry" took place. And evangelism. Not on purpose, but it took place.

One young man had stopped, and in the process of talking to him, he revealed that he didn't have a driver's license - he had stolen the family car and was running away from home. We talked with him, and prayed with him, and I asked him what HE thought his biggest problem was. He broke into tears, and blurted out "I think I need Jesus". That certainly was NOT the purpose of "Coffee Tent".

Our Church had been fairly small, but was growing, mostly from unchurched people coming to know Jesus, or at least, coming to investigate. One day, an older couple visited our Church, and after the Service, they came and told me they wanted to "join up". I had never seen them before, but they told me they had driven by on holidays and had seen our people out there serving coffee to travelers, and they said, "that's the kind of Church we want to join". They were workers. I mean - anything we needed done, any projects we had going on, they were there, supporting 100% That was not the purpose of "Coffee Tent".

In the 5 years we did this, over two dozen people prayed with us at our Coffee Tent (yeah, I'm a horrible Christian because I mentioned numbers ) to receive Jesus as Savior. We didn't push them - that wasn't even our intent. That was not the purpose of "Coffee Tent".

One Sunday Morning, one of our deacons approached me just before I was to get up to preach. He handed me an envelope and said that a lady had just dropped this off, and asked me to read it to the congregation. In the letter, which I read to the Church, she explained that she and her husband had stopped by our Coffee Tent at 3 AM on the way to Temple Hospital in Waco. Her husband's father was dying, and they wanted to get there in time to be with him. We had had prayer with them, and had asked God to allow the man to say goodbye to his Dad. They made it to the hospital, the man entered the room, he and his Dad held hands, and his Dad said, "I love you, son, but I'm going to Glory". And he died. In the envelope was a check made out to our Church for $5,000 for "ministry". That was not the purpose of "Coffee Tent".

To me, the Great Commission is more "AS you go, make disciples", and not so much "Go out there and hunt people down". Some of our best "evangelistic efforts" were never intended to be "evangelistic efforts". God is so good that way.

[shunyadragon]

The kind of Christianity you left is the kind I personally ran away from..... Really far away from. I wrote about some of my experience in a private journal. I left that part of the church and I won't go back. I did become Catholic but for personal reasons I am not there either. I am a Christian but far from evangelical.

Careful words like 'religion,' proselytizing,' and 'evangelical' are not always bad, but like other words they can be used as stones as scapegoats to throw at people who believe differently, or as generalizing terms for the behavior or even other beliefs that offend us.

[Cow Poke]

The problem is the obligatory aspect of the gospel that is easily misunderstood. If you merely let your good works be the goal and barely mention the tropes of Christianity at all, is that ultimately a help or a hindrance to the kingdom? I'd wager that this approach is more demonstrative of faith then one with an explicit pedagogical end goal, which casts suspicion on your motive just like any explicit proselytic goal by ANY religion, from Scientology to Mormonism, casts suspicion. It would seem God would be more honoring of the subtle approach.

Yeah, note that I was writing my "Coffee Tent" post before I saw this one. I don't think we could have been any more subtle - we were just handing out free coffee, not expecting anything other than maybe helping people stay awake to arrive safely at their destination.

[Cow Poke]

Since this thread was started as a thinly veiled attack on ME (I'm kidding, Pman - kinda) I'll add something else.

I think the REAL problem is that, in my own humble but accurate opinion, the MAIN element that is missing in "bad evangelism" is the Holy Spirit.

When the Holy Spirit is truly at work, it doesn't matter if the evangelistic effort is "subtle" or, as Paul preferred - BOLD. Even "bad evangelism" works when the Holy Spirit is involved.

Case in point -

In the early 70's, I was training some of our young people at our Church in evangelism the way I learned it. Cathy was a young lady who had a heart for Jesus. We "practiced" "door to door evangelism", and I taught her how to knock on the door, introduce us, get us invited in, introduce the "Four Spiritual Laws" booklet, and lead the "prospect" through the book to the point where you ask them if they would like to pray.

We practiced it over and over.

Then we "hit the door". It went south. Cathy was nervous. When the woman answered the door, Cathy didn't introduce us, didn't get us invited into the house --- she just buried her nose in the booklet and read, monotone, through the entire booklet, us on the porch outside, the woman standing inside on the other side of the closed screen door.

I was embarrassed. I kept waiting for Cathy to stop reading long enough for me to "save the day". Cathy never stopped. Even when she got to the question - "would you like to pray to ask Jesus into your heart", it was a nervous monotone delivery.

But then, to my utter surprise, the woman on the other side of the door began sobbing, and said, "yes, I would". She opened the door and invited us in, we talked for a few minutes, and she prayed to receive Jesus as Lord.

This was yet another lesson for me. It's not the booklet or pamphlet or "program" - it was obviously the power of the Holy Spirit.

[Jedidiah]

This is NOT a thread I'd like to see resolve along familiar lines of us vs them.

So to avoid this you post . . . v

Subtitled: 'And why I don't like it.'

[snip]

I despise evangelism. To me it is a sign of dishonesty and manipulation. It's almost always simple minded. It demeans the Other, because it so hardly ever listens to the life experience the other person has.