Topical Studies


 Home Page

Efficient Biblical Evangelism

James Hilston

1 September 2001

Introduction and objective: The aim of this discussion is to deal with two matters with respect to evangelism. The first issue pertains to how evangelism is portrayed and commanded in the scripture. Secondly we will discuss strategy and efficiency in evangelizing. We all occasionally find ourselves in a situation in which we have an opportunity to share the gospel, but not much time in which to do it. For example, such occasions may arise in the workplace, in the grocery line, at a family gathering, or while you're at the library with your children. In today's world, people seem to be busier than ever, have less time on their hands, and are always in a hurry. So it is fitting in today's world to be able to share and teach the gospel without getting sidetracked into time-consuming distractions. My goal in this is not to provide a script or to tell you what to say, but rather to offer some guidelines on how to go about thinking of what to say- to think on your feet and to avoid unnecessary pitfalls in a debate or discussion.

I. Define terms:

A. Evangelize. From the Greek word, euaggelizw euaggelizo (2097) from 2095 (eu = well, good) and 32 (aggelos = messenger, message). to bring good news, to announce glad tidings. 55 occurrences: preach 23, preach the gospel 22, bring good tidings 2, show glad tidings 2, bring glad tidings 1, declare 1, declare glad tidings 1, misc 3. An examination of the contexts of the verses on evangelism shows that the word primarily refers to the initial presentation of good news, i.e., its announcement. Mt 9:35 11:1 Lu 4:43 Ac 8:40 (see v. 35). In other words, once the good news is announced, the further teaching and development of doctrine is not regarded as "preaching the gospel" or "evangelizing," per se, at least according to its usage. See Acts 15:35.

B. Gospel

1. Definition: 2098 euaggelion euaggelion from the same as 2097, above. "Gospel" is simply good news, or glad tidings. It occurs 77 times and is rendered variously as: gospel 46, gospel of Christ 11, gospel of God 7, gospel of the Kingdom 3, misc 10. The word "gospel" itself comes from a contraction of the words "good" and "spell." The Anglo-Saxon "Spel" means "word" or "saying," such as, "to cast a spell."

2. The Gospel content: It ought to be noted that while the word "evangelize" refers to the initial announcement of the "good news," the contextual usage of the word "gospel" entails much more. Most often, "gospel" indicates the full and detailed content of one's particular hope.

a. The full content of Israel's gospel: Mt. 4:23
b. The full content of the Gentile gospel: Acts 15:7 17:17 18:4
c. The full content of the Body gospel: Col 1:23-29 1Ti 1:11

3. Distinctive gospels: The word is used to indicate particular good news to the three households of God's elect:

a. Israel (Isa 52:7 61:1 cf. Mt 11:5 Lu 4:18 7:22)
b. Gentile nations (14:6)
c. Body of Christ (Gal. 2:7 etc.; see other studies).

C. Evangelism. By examining the usage and specific meanings of "gospel" and "evangelize", we may regard evangelism as a task always comprising at least two phases: The gospel preaching (evangelizing) phase, and the gospel-teaching phase. We also see in the scriptures a third phase, falling between the preaching and teaching, namely, a period of disputing.

1. First phase, evangelize: To announce the gospel. Part of announcing the "good news" is knowing, or drawing out, what is the "unknown god" of the person you are evangelizing, i.e., what is "good news" in this particular case.

2. Middle phase, disputation. Before we are able to actually teach the gospe we will often need to engaging in disputing with the person whom we are trying to reach. Acts 9:22 17:1-3 17:17 18:4,19 19:8,9 28:23 This phase will involve a longer period than is suggested by the "announcement of the gospel," and is directed toward:

a. Securing an unconditional surrender to the Truth 2Co 10:5
b. Eviscerating the opponent's worldview Ro 1:18-22

3. Final phase, teaching the particular content of the Gospel.

D. Believers and unbelievers: For the purposes of this discussion, our primary concern will not be whether or not a person is a true believer, although we will discuss how someone's belief system affects our approach. Since we rarely know for certain the state of one's soul, we approach each case by making an operational determination based on whatever one professes, and how well one makes their claim. By using this tack, we avoid getting prematurely sidetracked into openly questioning or proving whether or not one's claim, either way, is legitimate. The course of the discussion will most likely reveal one's true state. There is a vast range of beliefs and belief systems that exist in the world, and rather than attempt to categorize these systems or the individuals that adopt them as "believer" or "non-believer" or as "Christian" versus "non-Christian", suffice it to say that we deal with people as individuals. So, while it may be useful to have some background knowledge about Open Theism, for example, when someone tells you he or she is an open theist, it is neither necessary nor always helpful, especially if they happen to differ from open theist doctrine on any particular point.

 

E. Strategy: By this we will refer to one's approach, reasoned response, or planned polemic ("art of disputation") in the face of our opportunities of evangelism. There is probably as wide a variety of beliefs that could be encountered as there are people in the world, however, I have found that a few basic strategies will enable you to point your opponents to two crucial truths (Prov. 26:4,5):

1. The irrationality of his or her current belief
2. The exclusive rationality of the Gospel

*Note regarding the Gospel: For each household of God's elect, the content of its respective gospel message will be specific to that household (cf. Heb 4:3). For example, for the Body of Christ, there is are the following distinctives:

1. Hope (Col 1:5, 23 cf. 1:26 cf. 1Pe 4:6 the Hope of deceased Jews)
2. Salvation (1Co 15:1-3 Eph 1:13)
3. Standard of righteousness, or law (Ro 2:16 Gal 2:7 Php 1:27-29 2Th 1:8 cf. 1Pe 4:17 obedience to Jewish gospel)

F. The scope of evangelism.

1. The professing church. It is remarkable to compare modern evangelicals with the religious elite of Jesus's day. Our modern scribes, pharisees, Sanhedrin, teachers of the law, etc. react to Paul's gospel in much the same way that the first-century counterparts reacted to Jesus and the Twelve.

2. Those outside of the professing church. Acts 17:18 (pagan philosophers) 14:8-18 (Gentile/pagan regions). Today, it is almost fashionable to be an atheist, a Druid, a Wiccan, a Zen Buddhist, etc. These, too, have first century counterparts and we may learn much from seeing Paul's example. See Acts 17:18 & context.

III. Strategies: As stated above, by "strategy" we refer to one's approach, response, or method of making one's initial "good news" announcement (evangelism), and the specific arguments that follow (teaching and defending).

A. Good (right) and poor (wrong) strategies: A good strategy is one that is taught or modeled in the scripture. Acts 17:2,17 18:4,19. A poor strategy is one that is unbiblical or deliberately extrabiblical.

The late Greg Bahnsen, in a debate with R.C. Sproul about apologetics, said:

Two things apologetics is not. First, apologetics is not mere persuasion. Much of the popular literature in the area of theistic and anti-theistic apologetics consists of highly polemical and emotional efforts at converting others. And to be sure, it is often our duty to seek to convince others of our own position. Sadly, however, these efforts too frequently take a form that substitutes psychological persuasion for careful and fair argumentation. Both believers and unbelievers are guilty of this ­ at least in my estimation. For it's a sad fact of life that logically poor arguments are often psychologically effective in convincing people of the truth of a position. Conversely, good arguments can be psychologically ineffective. And we may consequently find ourselves confronted by a moral dilemma when we discover that certain bad arguments and glib slogans will be found more convincing by a larger audience than what, in fact, really are good arguments. When we, on top of this, judge the issue that is being disputed to be one of high importance in our lives, such as in the case of apologetics, we are especially tempted to put bad arguments in the service of the truth. The Christian apologist ought to be the one person on earth who will resist this temptation. For we only dishonor the truth and ultimately dishonor the Lord of truth when we use fraudulent and suspicious forms of argument in promoting the truth. So, in the first place, apologetics is not mere persuasion. We may persuade a lot of people to becomes Christians on the basis of very bad arguments, but our task as apologists is to find good arguments, one which will not be found out later to be fraudulent when somebody with greater intellectual talent comes along to investigate.

B. Things to remember:

1. Remember the imago Dei. i.e., all men, unbelievers included, are made in the image of God

a. The rational man recognizes truth Ro 1:18ff

a.1 Man cannot escape his own rationality (both regenerate and non-regenerate).
a.2 The reprobate will eventually become irreparably self-deluded and numbed to the truth. Ro 1:28

b. The denial of the truth causes unrest Ac 18:6 2Ti 2:25 (Opposing themselves)

b.1 For both regenerate and non-regenerate, but to varying degrees

b.2 The reprobate will eventually become numbed to the unrest 1Ti 4:2 (conscience seared as with a hot iron)

2. Remember how the truth affected you.

a. Avoid the Mexican standoff (recall Prov. 26:4,5: Dismantle their worldview, and/or secure a surrender).

b. Recognize that each person must discover the truth for themselves. Recognize resistance and acceptance.

3. Remember that God is sovereign in evangelism (Acts 13:48)

a. In a sense, the pressure is off. Do your best, and remind yourself that God is in control.

b. If a discussion does not seem to go well, remind yourself that God is in control.

c. After a discussion, when you're reflecting and wishing you had or had not said one thing or another, remind yourself that God is in control.

4. Remember to steer the discussion in the direction of the scripture.That is, the more efficiently you can move the dialogue to a discussion of the Bible, the better you'll be able to challenge the opponent's view and confront him/her with the truth.

5. The truth turn worlds upside down. Ac 17:6 (anecdote: "God is not the author of confusion")

C. Ice breakers:

1. Making opportunities:

a. Life issues (and death)

a.1 Homeless people
a.2. Substance abuse
a.3. Loss of loved one
a.4. Mental illness

b. Political issues

b.1. Death penalty
b.2. Personal responsibility and government
b.3. Public education

c. Scientific issues

c.1. Evolution
c.2. Medicine (AIDS, vaccinations, physician/priests)
c.3. Conflicts of interest (government funding)

d. Popular movies, TV programs, songs

d.1. Immorality
d.2. Immodesty
d.3. Disrespect

2. Reacting to opportunities. When someone brings up any of the above or similar topics, we might begin a dialogues by saying:

a. What do you mean by that?

b. Are you familiar with the different views on that topic?

c. Is it your perception that most people believe that or feel that way?

d. I have a different opinion of that.

e. Have you always felt that way?

 

D. Basic strategies of debate, discussion, and drawing the opponent out. i.e. Find out what their authority is; find out what their "unknown god" is. Acts 17:16,22-23

1. Ask questions and/or observe: Discovery

a. Encourage him/her to explain what he/she believes

a.1. Ask for definitions of terms (what do you mean by that?)

a.2. Gives you time to think and strategize

a.3. Helps you to be sympathetic to him/her as a person

b. If the person is not forthcoming, see part 2.

2. Ask questions: "anti-catechism" (to teach or summarize via question and answer format)

a. In other words, are you saying ... ? (anecdote: Homeschoolers picnic; death penalty discussion)

b. Why that is relevant?

c. How do you know that?

d. Why? (Keep asking this. You want to find out what their "unknown god" is)

3. Parts 1. and 2. will often occur together.

4. Revealing their "authority" Knowing the scriptures will help you to expose the inadequacies false authority and exclusively take their rightful place as ultimate in authority over all. Ro 5:5 Let God be true and every man a liar.

a. Pastor/priest

b. Respected friends or teachers

c. Historic confession, church fathers, antiquity

d. Popular opinion

e. Scientific establishment

4. Examples of "unknown gods" Knowing the scriptures will help you to identify the "unknown" and to exclusively provide coherent and sufficient answers.

a. The mystery of death

b. Pain and suffering in the world

c. The Bible itself

c.1. Why are there so many denominations?

c.2. Why is there so much disagreement about what the Bible teaches?

c.3. The Bible is not fully knowable (God must keep things in His word hidden)

d. Miracles (or the lack thereof)

e. Angels (or the lack thereof)

f. Eschatology

 

E. Considering the various kinds of audiences or opponents one might encounter. Recall the apologetic principles of (a) answering the fool according to his folly, and (b) answering not the fool according to his folly (Prov. 26:4,5). To repeat what was said in the objective: The intent is not to provide a script, but rather to offer some fundamental ideas to move the debate along, to help you to think on your feet, and to avoid pitfalls or irrelevant distractions.

1. So-called atheists: Atheists can be very sensitive about how they are defined. Some view atheists as those who reject the existence of God. Others view atheists as those who do not believe in God. While these may be historically true, depending on whom you ask or read, the modern atheists seem to prefer to have themselves characterized as those without belief in a god or gods. It is a common error among Christians to assume that buddhists have a belief in a supreme being. Actually, Buddhism is a form of atheism, rejecting the notion of God as a higher or supreme being.

a. Show that his/her worldview is absurd and cannot coherently account for his/her own existence and experience.

a.1. Things become their opposites. For example: Laws of logic come from acausal chance, and living matter comes from non-living matter. You might acknowledge the atheist view as "an interesting story," but point out that it is completely unjustified (epistemologically and ontologically).
a.2. Morality. Challenge the atheistic basis for morality. Show that the notion of morality from nature ("happiness") is arbitrary. (anecdote: Politicians and adultery)
a.3. Science and scientific method. Challenge the basis for a belief in its veracity. i.e. Why should we trust it? Was it scientifically determined that the scientific method is the correct method for discovering facts?

b. Show that the Biblical worldview alone coherently accounts for human experience and existence.

b.1. Demonstrate from scripture how the atheist borrows from the Biblical worldview in order to function in life.
b.2. Declare the truth of God's existence, and the atheist's excuseless accountability to his Creator.

c. Examples

c.1. Materialists, strict empiricists: Man can gain knowledge only through sense experience. The absurdity of this is the claim itself. Did man get that principle itself from sense experience?
c.2. Atheists will claim that religion is harmful. Ask them to define harmful, and to justify the claim that something harmful is bad or wrong.
c.3. Atheists will challenge God to reveal Himself, to give better proof of His existence, etc. Affirm that the Bible says they have had sufficient proof and that they suppress the truth in unrighteousness.
c.4. Atheists enjoy pointing out errors or contradictions in the Bible. This can be a time-consuming pitfall. To avoid this, assure him that he cannot come up with a single one that has not been rigorously examined. Then ask, if all the Biblical controversies were resolved, would he then believe the gospel? In other words, "Is that all that is holding you back?"

2. Professing believers: Among those who profess belief in God, faith in Christ, and of the scriptures as infallible and inerrant, one might encounter those who hold to doctrines characterized as Presbyterian, Assemblies of God, Seventh-Day Adventist, Baptist, Arminian, Plymouth Brethren, Reformed, Open theist, Messianic Jew or completed Jew, Covenantalist, etc. We might call these "evangelical religions."

a. Show where the opposing doctrine is internally incoherent

a.1. The errors will almost always lie in the ignorance or neglect of the Body gospel
a.2. Those errors can be shown to lead to self-contradictions within the doctrine.

b. Show where the opposing doctrine contradicts scripture. Most likely, the contradictions will be the result of failure to discern the Body gospel. Occasionally, the debate might boil down to whether or not the scriptures are knowable.

c. Examples of topics that lead to discussion of doctrine. Questions or remarks from others may include:

3. Pseudo-believer. We may refer to a pseudo-believer (false believer) as anyone who holds to a distorted conception of God or Christ, and/or deny either the scriptures, or their infallibility or inerrancy. While this category might arguably include many listed in 2, we offer such examples as Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Hindus, Deists, Unitarians, Judaism, Catholicism, etc. These we might call "non-evangelical religions" or not considered part of mainstream evangelicalism.

a. Show where the opposing belief is internally incoherent. All non-biblical religions and worldviews are fraught with self-contradictions. It is usually only a matter of asking a few questions to get the logical problems to surface. The point of calling attention to these problems is to get the person to admit that irrationality is acceptable on their worldview.

b. Show where the opposing belief contradicts the scripture:

b.1. Muslims believe their scriptures were received from angels in 600 A.D.
b.2. Certain Hindu teachings include a pantheon of gods.
b.3. Judaism clings to the notion of a modern Israel before God.
b.4. Jehovah's Witnesses reject the triunity of the Godhead.

c. Topics for discussion. Most of the debate between biblical doctrine and non-evangelical religions will fall under one or more of the following:

c.1. Nature of revelation
c.2. Nature of God
c.3. Moral absolutes
c.4. Problem of pain, suffering, and evil
c.5. Nature of man and the human condition
c.6. Eschatology

E. Aids to focusing on the Body Gospel. Over the course of discussing your disagreements with the opposing view, it is crucial to keep Paul's gospel in the forefront of our thinking, and to be deliberately steering the discussion toward that goal.

1. Mystery approach: to talk about the "mystery" and ask what was "hidden" or "held in silence" from the prophets.

2. The Hope approach: to talk about the Body of Christ's Hope (to sit with Christ) contrast to Israel & the nations.

3. Angels approach: to talk about the distinctive relationship between angels & the Body.

4. Holidays approach: to talk about Paul's distinctively non-ceremonial gospel and the Body of Christ.

F. How NOT to preach the gospel. One "hinders" the gospel 1Co 9:12 by behaving in a non-Pauline manner, i.e., by NOT following Paul as Paul followed Christ. One can bring reproach upon the message by non-Pauline behavior. (1Th 2:9). Compare 1Ti 6:12.

G. The result of evangelism

1.The professing church divided. Acts 17:1-8

a. vv. 1-4 Those who believe. See also Acts 17:10-12 (14:1-4)

b. vv. 5-8 Those who do not believe. See also Acts 17:13

2. World is turned upside down. Acts 17:6

H. A proper evangelical attitude

1. Stamina. Disputing and persuading for however long it takes (weeks, months, years) Acts 17:2 18:4 19:8

2. Sensitivity: Being stirred in one's spirit (Acts 17:16,17) The Greek word for stirred can be translated: to stimulate, spur on, urge, to irritate, provoke, arouse to anger. Paul had an profound reaction to the idolatry, and it moved him to approach the evangelicals of his day.

3. Readiness: 2Ti 4:2 1Pe 3:15

4. Recognize that our discussions may be overheard by others Acts 13:32-42 17:17,18

5. Prayer: Praying for opportunities for evangelism: Eph 6:18,19 Col 4:3 2Th 3:1

6. Knowing when to quit. Acts 19:8-10

V. Conclusion: Evangelism entails "evangelizing", i.e., the initial declaration of "good news," disputation on the matters of truth versus error, and teaching the gospel (instruction in the full content of faith). While some of the strategies and arguments require some practice, our primary concern in evangelizing ought to be to know what the Bible says so we are prepared when those opportunities come. With a few basic guidelines, we can avoid the trappings of derailed discussions and the logs that get thrown in the road, and keep the dialogue focused on our true aim: The defense and teaching of the Body gospel. Furthermore, sharing our experiences with one another, we encourage and equip each other to run the race, to fight the good fight, and to boldly defend and preach the faith as it was revealed to Paul for the Body of Christ.


TGF Home Page