# Phil Johnson on Open-Air Preaching



## ClayPot (Apr 4, 2011)

The topic has come up on Puritan Board now and then about whether open-air preaching is appropriate/helpful. Phil Johnson has a post on this that I appreciated. I hope some of you do too.

Pyromaniacs: Street-Preaching


----------



## AThornquist (Apr 4, 2011)




----------



## Whitefield (Apr 4, 2011)

hmm ... methinks there was a George _somebody_ who was a street preacher ... what was his last name?


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 4, 2011)

Lance, 

George Whitefield preached out-of-doors, almost always at the request of people and people gathered to hear him voluntarily. Many street preachers nowadays harangue passers-by who have no choice as to whether to hear them or not.

Jay Smith, who preaches in Hyde Park, is pictured. Notice that he goes to where there is a cultural acceptance and long-standing practice of public speaking/preaching. Hyde Park is the modern equivalent of the Areopagus and so this is a very appropriate setting.

Also, at places of heinous sin, such as in front of abortion clinics and strip clubs, a public witness for the Gospel would be effective and appropriate.

While I sure wouldn't want people to think that street preaching is the only model or even the best model of evangelism, I am glad for those who do it well.


----------



## Der Pilger (Apr 9, 2011)

Thanks for that link. I'm glad that he posted it. Public proclamation of the gospel is biblical and certainly the best approach as long as it conveys the truth faithfully and accurately. That can* never* be wrong, and Scripture knows of no other way to come to saving faith but through hearing the Word.


----------



## Edward (Apr 9, 2011)

Well, if we're going to re-hash old threads, I'll repeat my point from the earlier discussions. 

I have no problem with street preaching - although I'm not convinced that it is effective as practiced today. I am opposed to assaulting captive audiences on buses and trains, however, as seems to be the practice of some group operating in Dallas these days. If you want to be a martyr, don't do it where I might end up as collateral damage.


----------



## Der Pilger (Apr 9, 2011)

> I have no problem with street preaching - although I'm not convinced that it is effective as practiced today.



There are various ways that it is practiced today. Which approach are you referring to specifically?



> I am opposed to assaulting captive audiences on buses and trains, however, as seems to be the practice of some group operating in Dallas these days. If you want to be a martyr, don't do it where I might end up as collateral damage.


I'm not sure how that amounts to "assault," but I tend to agree with you. I would quickly add, though, that I wouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I think in that particular situation, where people can't get away, a better approach would be to hand out tracts to the people sitting down on the train and then try to start a one-on-one conversation with someone a little while later, kind of along the lines of, "Did you get a chance to read that leaflet? What did you think?"

But regarding effectiveness, it's a mistake from the outset to go about evaluating an outreach ministry on the basis of its results because we are unable to measure the results. How can we? How could we possibly evaluate what impact the gospel message had on any person in a crowd? We cannot. There's no way to know if even just one person in the crowd--someone you didn't even notice was there the whole time--went home deeply convicted of sin and was granted repentance unto life and faith in Christ.

I'm convinced that the great error that many evangelicals make lies in that very criterion of "effectiveness" they use to evaluate street preaching. For most evangelicals, effectiveness equates to visible, measurable results. If something does not provide a measurable return, they see it as unprofitable and try to come up with another approach.

If people are determined to use effectiveness as their criterion, though, here is something they should look for: glorification of God. The blog post by Phil Johnson made an excellent point: The goal of evangelism is not just to make converts. It is primarily to glorify God. For the purpose of glorifying God, public proclamation of the gospel that is faithful and accurate is always effective.


----------



## Edward (Apr 9, 2011)

Der Pilger said:


> There are various ways that it is practiced today. Which approach are you referring to specifically?



The guys I see on the street corners in Downtown Dallas. That's the only 'open air' preaching I've seen around here other than the mainly Dipsys that set up a tent in Deep Ellum a few years ago



Der Pilger said:


> I think in that particular situation, where people can't get away, a better approach would be to hand out tracts to the people sitting down on the train and then try to start a one-on-one conversation with someone a little while later, kind of along the lines of, "Did you get a chance to read that leaflet? What did you think?"



I have no problem with the one on one approach - I've done similar myself.


----------



## Josh Williamson (Apr 13, 2011)

Great post by Phil (but as an open air preacher I may be biased).


----------

