# How important is being friendly in evangelism?



## N. Eshelman (May 22, 2008)

Great quote from Packer on the necessity of being friendly in evangelism.


----------



## BobVigneault (May 22, 2008)

I believe that winsomeness is absolutely crucial to evangelism and it's biblical. Let's not confuse evangelism with apologetics. Sometimes defending the faith is part of proclaiming the gospel but most times we are tearing down strongholds.

So with evangelism we should be friendly, in defending the faith, not so much.



> 2 Tim. 2:24 And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.
> 
> 1 Pet. 3:13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.
> 
> ...


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 22, 2008)

BobVigneault said:


> I believe that winsomeness is absolutely crucial to evangelism and it's biblical. Let's not confuse evangelism with apologetics. Sometimes defending the faith is part of proclaiming the gospel but most times we are tearing down strongholds.
> 
> So with evangelism we should be friendly, in defending the faith, not so much.



An exceedingly useful distinction - even if made by a cartoon


----------



## Dearly Bought (May 22, 2008)

As carefully as possible, I think I have to take issue with Dr. Packer's perspective. I am particularly critical of the popular idea that believers must "earn the right" to speak to another person about Christ. Although this seems to make sense at first glance, I don't think it squares with the Biblical witness. Isn't Acts full of scenes where faithful believers are "expounding the things of God to reluctant strangers who are longing to get away"? I'm afraid that Packer's understanding of evangelism falls short at this point by unwittingly borrowing from the salesman's handbook instead of the Scriptures. The right to proclaim the Gospel has been earned by Christ himself and does not need to be granted in any way by an unbeliever. We are heralds of the King, not salesmen for a product. As a herald of Christ, I actually am tasked with the duty of "intrusive barging into the privacy of other people's souls." I am able to speak to their lives without the necessary basis of deep personal interaction precisely because my witness is to an objective historical work of God in Christ.

To tell the truth, the following sentence really scares me,



> We have to give ourselves in honest friendship to people, if ever our relationship with them is to reach the point at which we are justified in choosing to talk to them about Christ, and can speak to them about their own spiritual needs without being either discourteous or offensive.



Justified in choosing to talk to them about Christ? The Great Commission is justification enough for me. Where is the urgency in proclamation? This confirms my worst fears about the manner in which Reformed believers can sometimes use _Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God._ So much great stuff in that little volume, but it is very easy to react against the excesses of revivalism and "decision"-oriented evangelism by retreating into a complacent mentality that "God is sovereign, so there is no real urgency to evangelism."

Now, don't get me wrong here. I am very cognizant of the need for a winsome witness in one sense. I believe that we must proclaim the Gospel in such a manner that others will be able to see the love of God in our eyes, never a self-righteous pride. As the old saying goes, we must be beggars pointing other beggars to life-giving bread. However, borrowing from a wise distinction made on another recent thread, this attitude is a moral necessity for the believer, yet not essential to evangelism. I can rejoice with Paul as long as the Christ is proclaimed, even if it is not out of love (Philippians 1:18). Evangelistic power is ultimately rooted in the efficacy of _the Word_ not the subjective manner of the one who proclaims it.


----------



## jogri17 (May 22, 2008)

being friendly is good just don't use chick tracts


----------



## BobVigneault (May 22, 2008)

You are correct Bryan. I like what you wrote. I would encourage, however, as we form our 'style' to consider the language of Paul in 2 Cor. 5:

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

* ours is a ministry of reconciliation
* in God's own ministry of reconciliation he did not count the world trespasses against them (yes, it would take a while to unpack that)
* he entrusted to us a message of reconciliation
* we are ambassadors
* we are making an appeal, we are to implore

We are not to make the message appealing or even friendly. We are to PROCLAIM the Gospel with it's love and mercy, judgment and wrath, atonement and propitiation, but we can do that using loving and friendly words.


----------



## BobVigneault (May 22, 2008)

I'm working presently to try and reconcile a young couple who just separated and it reminded me of something that happened long ago. 

About a hundred years ago, well, I guess it was about 28 years, I messed up in my marriage. My wife wanted a divorce and fortunately there were no children yet. I was clearly the offender and the pastor called to say the elders wanted me to come to the church and meet with them. My response: "Who do they think they are? I don't have to answer to them. They are no better than me. They are not in any position to judge me. NO, I WILL NOT!"

What do you think the elders did? (Yes, I met with the pastor and two more and that didn't help.) Then, they called a good friend of mine. Not only a friend, but a friend who, years before, had gone before the elders in discipline. He came to my house and spoke as my friend. He told me what would happen when I met with them and that they were seeking to reconcile me to my wife, to the church and to God. He spoke in friendly words without trying to whitewash my sins. After much talk and hugs and tears I agreed to meet with the elders. They helped to bring about the reconciliation. Years later, I would be one of the elders who would be trying to restore others.

That is how a ministry of reconciliation is conducted.


----------



## py3ak (May 22, 2008)

Bryan, I agree that the great commission gives the church the right to authoritatively proclaim the Gospel. But I am trying to think of uncaring people being in one way or another _obliged_ to listen in the book of Acts and I'm coming up short. When Gallio cared for none of those things, he didn't listen. I can't think of any reluctant stranger who wanted to get away who was buttonholed anyway. Can you help out my failing memory?


----------



## etexas (May 22, 2008)

joshua said:


> Bob, you big teddy bear.



Chuckle! Sorry Bob.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 22, 2008)

jogri17 said:


> being friendly is good just don't use chick tracts



 I used to give out LOADS of them in Belfast...before I learned that Calvinism was Biblical, then I used others.


----------



## Josiah (May 22, 2008)

jogri17 said:


> being friendly is good just don't use chick tracts



forgive my ignorance, but what is a chick tract?


----------



## uberkermit (May 22, 2008)

Josiah said:


> forgive my ignorance, but what is a chick tract?



They are tracts produced and distributed by Jack Chick. You can check some out here.


----------



## Ivan (May 22, 2008)

uberkermit said:


> Josiah said:
> 
> 
> > forgive my ignorance, but what is a chick tract?
> ...



You can, but do you *want* to?


----------



## uberkermit (May 22, 2008)

Ivan said:


> You can, but do you *want* to?



Jack Chick's tracts are not worth much, to be sure. I supplied the link so Josiah could get an idea of what they are. Perhaps I should have put a disclaimer with the link, warning of faulty teaching...


----------



## larryjf (May 22, 2008)

I better stop wearing my "did you burn a heretick today" t-shirt when i evangelize


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 22, 2008)

larryjf said:


> I better stop wearing my "did you burn a heretick today" t-shirt when i evangelize



Yeah, they might think you're a Theonomist.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (May 22, 2008)

larryjf said:


> I better stop wearing my "did you burn a heretick today" t-shirt when i evangelize




Where can I get one of those?


----------



## larryjf (May 22, 2008)

Here are some that are close...


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (May 22, 2008)

larryjf said:


> Here are some that are close...




 I thought you were joking when you said:



> I better stop wearing my "did you burn a heretick today" t-shirt when i evangelize


.


----------



## Timothy William (May 22, 2008)

A friend of mine on another discussion board, a woman named Kelly, used to have in her signature "I will not expect people to believe 'Jesus loves me, this I know' until they can believe 'Kelly loves me this I know'"


----------



## kvanlaan (May 23, 2008)

> being friendly is good just don't use chick tracts



We hear about the wonders of Chick tracts _from the pulpit _on occasion. :shudder:


----------



## DMcFadden (May 23, 2008)

Oh, man! Do you mean I can't wear this one anymore either?


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 4, 2008)

In evangelism we are out to win people and not arguments. Apologetics may be different but in evangelism people are "drawn" and "attracted" whereas in apologetics we can beat them and turn their arguments into pretzels.

A study of the J_ people revealed that over 80% were attracted to Christianity due to Christian friends expressing love to them, and then only later intellectually believed the doctrines. These people did believe in the correct doctrine, but God used friends as the initial entry point of the Gospel into their hearts.

A study of nearby groups revealed these same statistics.... Christians lovingly serving their local friends and family and offering Christ very gloriously and attractively is the way to win those in ones web of influence, at least in this people-group cluster. 

Cold contacts with strangers in a 2 second paper exchange of a tract (sorry, I know God can use tracts, but I think personal contact is much more effective and biblical) was not effective but only led to anger in this local context.

With the US hardening in their disgust of telemarketers, I think that this study could be replicated with the same resultsin the US for our present generation.


----------



## caddy (Jun 4, 2008)

Josiah said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> > being friendly is good just don't use chick tracts
> ...


 
It's good to know some people _aint tainted! _


----------



## Dearly Bought (Jun 4, 2008)

py3ak said:


> Bryan, I agree that the great commission gives the church the right to authoritatively proclaim the Gospel. But I am trying to think of uncaring people being in one way or another _obliged_ to listen in the book of Acts and I'm coming up short. When Gallio cared for none of those things, he didn't listen. I can't think of any reluctant stranger who wanted to get away who was buttonholed anyway. Can you help out my failing memory?



I should probably clarify exactly what I'm thinking of. I don't mean that we find many examples where Christians incessantly concentrate their energies upon those who have clearly demonstrated hard hearts toward the Gospel. I rather mean to indicate that the proclamation of the Gospel we see in Acts is often to a hostile crowd. Paul, immediately following his conversion, begins proclaiming the Gospel in the synagogues in Damascus and his hearers wanted to kill him (Acts 9:20-25)! It is my view that the apostolic example of evangelism is to approach unbelievers and proclaim the Gospel to them regardless of whether we know them or they have indicated interest in hearing. To what degree we persist in evangelizing to obviously hardened hearts following our initial proclamation is another question altogether.


----------

