If you’ve been discouraged from being involved in evangelism, maybe you’ve been trying to do someone else’s part. Try your own on for size.
When the Lord Jesus told His followers to go into all the world and preach the gospel to all people, He gave no detailed directions as to means or method. I assume He intended that disciples in every culture and in every age would find appropriate and effective ways to do it. Of course those ways should be both relevant to the unbelievers to be reached and consistent with the character of God and the dignity of the message we bear.
The apostle Paul was, to put it mildly, both an incisive thinker and an effective communicator. But he did not assume that his oratory alone was sufficient to win souls. Nor did he think—and this is crucial—that, if the Spirit was willing to work, methods didn’t matter. Instead he wrote: “that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22). A fisherman uses different bait for different fish, and Paul preached very different messages to the polytheistic philosophers in Athens than to the monotheistic religionists in Jerusalem.
I have recently been impressed, however, not only with the different message styles of the early believers; I have also noted the diverse methods influenced by the varied personalities which we meet in the New Testament. Do you see yourself somewhere in the picture?
1. The confrontational approach of Peter (Acts 2):
This style is not for everyone. It demands courage, boldness of speech, and an ability to “think on your feet.” Of all methods, it is the most likely to stir up animosity, but also has the potential advantage of reaching large numbers all at once. Such plainness of speech can bring both clarity and conviction by the Spirit to people we might otherwise never meet. It did so at Pentecost and has throughout Church history.
2. The apologetic approach of Paul (Acts 17; Romans):
Here the flamboyant emotion-laden appeal gives way to the deliberate, carefully-reasoned argument. Negatively, it can gender “words to no profit” (2 Tim. 2:14), but positively it is able both to bolster the faith of believers and demolish the strongholds of the enemy, setting free his captives. So it was at Mars Hill.
Some object to this method, saying that Paul’s intellectual style is akin to “enticing words of man’s wisdom.” As proof, they say there was no assembly formed in Athens, as far as we know. The argument is specious. It was Paul, after all, who instructed us not to preach with mere human wisdom; he obviously did not consider what he was doing to be in that category.
As far as results (not always the defining factor—recall the righteous preaching of Noah), I think I would be very happy to see what Paul saw at Athens. Imagine arriving at Harvard or Yale one morning, preaching one message in the open air, and having a professor, a high society grande dame, and several others trust the Lord that afternoon! Hardly a bad day’s work!
3. The testimonial approach of the man born blind (Jn. 9:25):
This way of preaching has the advantage of the evangelist knowing his subject matter—since he was there when it happened. “I was blind; now I see.” It is, or should be, convincing and almost impossible to refute. It is the favorite of those dramatically rescued from sin’s clutches, and the least likely to be used by those saved at an early age. Those who use this method would be wise to follow Paul’s example: each time he told his testimony there was less about himself, and the light kept shining brighter.
Some testimonies spend too much time on the BC (before Christ) part and too little on the change Christ produces in the life. Still, it can be one of the most convincing methods in the evangelist’s arsenal. Let’s get back to using testimonies; it may result in new ones.
4. The invitational approach of Andrew and the woman of Samaria (Jn. 1:40-41; 6:8-9; 12:22; 4:28-30):
Perhaps feeling ill-equipped to carefully explain the gospel, nonetheless such strategic servants have a deep concern for lost souls. Thank God for the bringers. The one disadvantage of this approach is the lack of control over what the ones brought will hear. How many have labored long and carefully to bring someone to an evangelistic gathering only to have the speaker unnecessarily offend the one brought by a careless remark or an unwise criticism of the person’s religion. How careful we ought to be who dare to speak as the “oracles of God.” I’ve had to learn this the hard way, sad to say. Thankfully, Jesus can reattach ears removed by a careless use of the sword!
5. The hospitable approach of Matthew (Lk. 5:29):
Many unbelievers who will not venture into a church building would come to your home for a meal. So thought Matthew, who knew his workmates from the tax office would be persona non grata at the local synagogue. Then why not have them into the less-threatening environment of the dining room? And it worked.
In my judgment, some of the most effective outreaches in North America today involve an open home and an open Bible. It is the winning combination of loving people and telling them the truth. We have never had such nice houses and well-stocked freezers, yet how much do we use them as birthplaces for souls? Jesus thought dinner time was an ideal venue for gospel witness, too (Mt. 9:10; 26:7; and many more). The relaxed atmosphere is ideal for this.
6. The good works approach of Dorcas (Acts 9):
How often we are reminded of the strategic role of good works in the life of the believer. “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Mt. 5:16), said the Saviour. “And let ours also,” wrote Paul to Titus, “learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful” (3:14). Observe the link in Paul’s mind between lack of good works and unfruitfulness. Selah!
There does seem to be a link between the obvious evidence that Dorcas was “full of good works and almsdeeds which she did” and the “many” who “believed in the Lord.” Would a return to being “full” of good works also lead to many believing? Sounds like a wonderful experiment!
7. The lifestyle approach of the healed demoniac of Gadara (Mk. 5:19; Lk. 8:39):
These two accounts of the story give two slightly differing instructions from the Lord to the man. Interestingly, Luke records the Lord as telling him to “show” the great things done for him by the Lord. It is Mark, the author of the Gospel of the Servant, that quotes the Lord as saying he should “tell” others of the Lord’s doings in his life. Yes, it’s “show and tell time” for us. Little use, telling without showing. Like the priestly garments, we need bells and pomegranates—both testimony and fruitfulness.
8. The supportive approach of many in New Testament days:
Paul wrote: “Help those women which labored with me in the gospel…” (Php. 4:3). He spoke of Aquila and Priscilla as “my helpers in Christ Jesus: who have for my life laid down their own necks,” and Phebe, “a servant of the church,” of Tryphena and Tryphosa “who labor in the Lord,” and Mary of Rome, “who bestowed much labor on us” (Rom. 16). There are many others as well.
They prayed, and spoke encouraging words, and gave of their funds, and showed up to share the reproach. They may have prepared meals for the Lord’s servants and washed their clothes. They helped with manual labor, assisting Paul in his tent-making business. They helped in preparing manuscripts and transported them from place to place. Many were unknown and no doubt many gave their lives for the cause. We shall meet them some day and thank them for the foundation they laid in beginning the process that eventually brought the gospel to our doors.
But all these rest from their labors. Now it is our turn. Let us “by all means” do it.