Achievable ends tells a story about something he witnessed a few days ago:
We piled onto one of the enumerable Park City Sundance buses and into the middle of what was apparently “bus evangelism”. A big guy with a huge Defined King James Version of the Bible in his hand, was seemingly in the middle of a multi-way conversation with a group of people – sort of talking about Jesus. He was wearing a Jesus Saves beanie, had a cross on the front of his hoody and was passionately threatening the “unsaved” with hellfire and damnation.At first, Imbi and I thought it was a stunt. I looked around for cameras. Then I asked an older fellow, “is this for real?” His response, “I don’t know.” I told the gentleman, who seemed a little stunned, that I was a Christian and that I felt this was no way to share the Good News of Jesus Christ. His response, “Oh, you’re a Christian?”
Most of the folk on the bus were attempting to ignore the commotion which continued unabated ‘til they came to the same stop as us. Then the loud-mouthed jerk person said, “OK street team. We’re getting off here.” The older fellow/gentleman above was part of the team, as were most of the people engaged in the “conversation.” (I guess he felt their mission was only to share certain truths – so lying to me was okay.) Is this stuff EVER effective?
Ditto on his question: is the above EVER effective?
Loading ...
February 1, 2008 at 11:42
No.
February 1, 2008 at 11:57
I think open-air style preaching works but not this lying style of “preching” that occured in your story. When preaching like that you tottaly invalidate your self by lying and shows hypocricy. If you preach open-air, you should preach hell but in love (sounds like an oxy-moron but its not)
God bless,
Anthony
February 1, 2008 at 12:26
Effective in strengthening the ranter’ sense of personal righteousness. Insulting others and playing on fear are usually effective for this.
And the only reason I can recognize it as such is that I am capable of such myself—only, I would like to think, smarter, sublteler such.
February 1, 2008 at 13:50
Chris,
While I’ve never experienced it first hand, my father tells of one of his Youth for Christ coworker who came to Christ because he heard some “evangelist” shouting things through a bullhorn on a street corner.
Maybe God works in spite of us?
Adam
February 1, 2008 at 17:27
I used to be somewhat opposed to street preaching, but I’ve heard enough tesitmonies of people who have come to Christ in these types of situations to doubt that it can be an effective form of evangelism. What I don’t understand is the “show” that was put on by the team. I guess they’re thinking that by having this “conversation” on the bus that people will hear their message and have some of their questions and doubts answered even if they are not engaged. I still don’t like the idea though. It’s strange way if not flat out wrong.
February 1, 2008 at 18:13
Every time I condemn an evangelism method as “ineffective,” I meet someone who came to Christ through that method. That’s not the same as saying that form of evangelism is Biblical, theological sound, or ethical, but I do think that God can and will use anything to draw all people to himself.
Perhaps the question shouldn’t be whether a method is “effective,” but perhaps whether the method brings glory to God.
February 1, 2008 at 23:54
It reminds me of the pastor or evangelist who does an alter call and thanks people for raising their hands, no one really does. It’s a lie, a scam, and down right shameful.
February 2, 2008 at 11:23
Any effectiveness that evangelism may have comes from the Holy Spirit. So long as the person being a witness for the Gospel is doing so at the promptings of the Spirit (and I don’t mean in a throw your hands up and speak in tongues way, I simply mean doing God’s will) then whatever method God inspires will work for whom it is meant to work. My husband came to the Lord through a street preacher in a New York City subway. Thousands of people passed that guy without being saved, but obviously God put him there for at least one person.
February 2, 2008 at 13:04
Back in the 70’s I used to do open air preaching regulary at the UC Berkely campus in its radical heyday. I can’t think of one person who came to Christ as a result. Since then I have used more relational approaches and have found them to be far more effective. A young man at my church is doing much of the same thing I did back then and even has a podcast recording his ventures (http://gospelofjesuschrist.mypodcast.com/index.html). He has created quite a stir but I do not see people coming to Christ or a church because of it. I have become convinced that evangelism is most effective when we apply both truth and relationship to our efforts. When people KNOW I authentically love them (and do not simply view them as a trophy to be won), they seem to be less defensive and open to the message they need to hear.
February 2, 2008 at 15:47
Show the love of Christ, only using words if necessary.
February 2, 2008 at 16:20
I have a standard response for people who offer me a gospel tract on street corners or buses:
“Thank you, I prefer to read the original for myself.”
Once a very sincere young man with slickbacked blonde hair looked quite confused and asked “What’s the original?”
February 2, 2008 at 17:26
Here at the University of Georgia, we call these guys Tate preachers – so named because they do this in the courtyard of the Tate Student Center. Their rambling “sermons” often include slurs directed against – well, everyone. I can safely say that they are laughed at, ignored, and/or despised by ninety-nine percent of the campus. Students occasionally argue with them, and it can never be said that they don’t draw a crowd.
From my experience, this style is not in and of itself effective. But, with that being said, it does open some very interesting doors. My friend Jon (a very inquisitive agnostic) and I were walking by a Tate preacher our freshman year, a discussion on what a “true” Christian really was. Almost without fail, I have this discussion with at least one person, Christian or not, during visits from the Tate preachers.
February 2, 2008 at 17:28
I can’t help but think of that street game where the guy moves the three shells around, and you try to guess which one the ball is under. Turns out, the “game” is that most of the “players” are really conspirators, pretending to play along (and occasionally “win”) in order to dupe unsuspecting observers into playing a rigged/unwinnable game where everyone involved splits the loot.
“Effective”, but unethical. Potentially harvesting doesn’t justify unethical (therefore immoral) seed-planting techniques. “Lie for the Lord”? I don’t think so.
As far as hellfire evangelism, I believe while it could and does work (without the lying), it seldom matches the Jesus/New Testament model of reaching unbelievers with the good news of Grace and emphasizing the free gift of forgiveness through faith in Christ.
However, judgment (Hell) shouldn’t be left out of the Gospel equation. As John Macarthur said, if there’s no Hell, what is this Savior “saving” us from?
February 3, 2008 at 04:41
Let us become braver in our witness. Phil 1:14
And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear. 15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: 16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: 17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. 18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice. 19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, 20 According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death.
February 4, 2008 at 12:47
Just one added thought – a large proportion of the evangelism that goes on in the Gospels and the book of Acts is open “street” preaching. I agree that the majority of the time people will come to Christ through a personal relationship, maybe even 99% of the time. But we cannot dismiss street preaching and open evangelism completely because it is biblical (and sometimes it does work, as in the case of my husband which I mentioned above).
February 4, 2008 at 16:23
Effective open air preaching in the New Testament was usually preceded by a demonstration of the Holy Spirit’s power. All Jesus sermons (including the sermon on the mount) were preceded by healing. The healing of the lame man by peter and John brought 5000 bystanders to the Lord. Paul’s open air preaching was accompanied by great miracles. When public preaching depended on just apologetics or sophistry, it was met with scoffing or few converts, such as at Athens. When people actually see the power of God displayed, it is an awesome and scary thing that immediately leads scores to repentance.That’s why Paul says, “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power”. This is the case with missionaries like Heidi Baker in Mozambique today. Roland and Heidi will often ask villagers to bring out their deaf. When they pray and God heals the deaf people, the entire village comes to Christ. This has enabled Heidi and Roland to start over 7000 churches in Mozambique in the last 15 years. I think one more thing to remember, when we are preaching to the public, Jesus says we are inviting people to the King’s wedding feast! That is a joyful happy word. After healing scores of people Jesus said “Blessed (literally Happy) are you…
February 4, 2008 at 19:51
Sadly, it seems that this “trickster evangelism” is becoming an endorsed practice in my own church. On Wednesday nights we are currently using the Way of the Master (www.wayofthemaster.com) videos with Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort.
I’ve been increasingly uncomfortable with this teaching because it’s “hellfire evangelism” which is the polar opposite of what brought me to Christ. But my true dislike came this past Wednesday with a series on using “good tracts” – all of which were gimmicks and tricks.
You can purchase a fake wallet or fake billion dollar bill to leave behind on the sidewalk, the doctor’s office,etc., a Ticket to Heaven, several illusions and silly IQ tests, all with a hellfire gospel message.
So it appears that this kind of street evangelism is now celebrity-endorsed.
February 5, 2008 at 11:49
Every semester it seems, my university campus is bombarded with these “evangelists” that declare damnation on all of us—Christian and non-Christian alike. Apparently if we like SEC football then we’re serving an idol or something. Ditto for being a student, etc, etc.
Even as a Christian I completely understand why so many non-Christians hate Christians. It’s people like this that give non-Christians a convenient means of dismissing Christianity because it’s easy to dismiss the messenger.
On the flip slide, I’ve seen a former college professor pull up a chair in a high-traffic area of campus and engage students in an intelligent and respectful conversation. People actually gathered around him to hear what he had to say. He didn’t make “I am right and you are wrong” arguments but pointed out that not all religions can be right because many contradict each other.
Which message do you think lingered in people’s minds? Which style did Jesus use?
February 5, 2008 at 13:32
Ahh, the infamous “Tate preachers”, I have to laugh at the mention of them on this blog. Those guys were certainly hilarious and entertaining, but NOT effective.
February 5, 2008 at 15:12
regarding Jamie’s comment; Which style did Jesus use? He was a healing evangelist. That was His style. He drew a crowd by hours of public healing, demonstrating the power of God. So did Paul, Peter, the 70, Phillip, even Stephen and many in the third world today. I agree, these Tate guys are annoying blowhards full of empty talk. But don’t just assume that Jesus was always a non-confrontational softie who depended on intelligent conversation. He called people white washed tombs, children of the devil, fools and had the annoying habit of saying there was only one way, not many. However, He was also kind, overflowing with love, he wept, jumped for joy and confirmed the word with “signs and wonders following”.
February 5, 2008 at 21:14
I can’t imagine any real christian criticizing any method of evangelism. When I first read the article, I was praising the Lord that people want to witness and share the gospel. So many of us let our fears get in the way of sharing the most precious gift. And if you are comfortable with selling Fire Insurance, then more power to the Hell-Fire preaching. Besides, it’s the truth. Oh, about the guy lying on the bus; If you are without sin, keep on throwing those stones. God bless us all and may we all evangelize with boldness.
February 6, 2008 at 11:09
The biggest problem with this approach is that you
tend to alienate the very people that you are supposed to be reaching. the best methods usually
include a relational approach. You must first
reach the person as a whole then you canreach the soul.
February 8, 2008 at 08:15
In the city of Oxford last June, on my first day in the UK, I was greatly encouraged and challenged to see young Christians engaged in energetic street preaching in Cornmarket, the busy shopping area just off the High Street. For me it was a wake-up call. Do I have a form of godliness yet deny its power? That same day, at the top of the same street, there were New Age exponents in Native American headdress offering something quite different. In the days when manic street preachers and big tent revivals were more than cliches, many Christians no doubt were wrenched from their comfort zones.