Should we now be Evangelize and spread the Good News to those who are disillusioned?

[steadfast7]

conclusion this digression re: Stephen ... he held an office that was specifically distinguished from that of preaching/teaching - yet he preached. Sorry for the tangent, all.

It is good that you accept he held an ordinary office. Now let's look at verse 8. As other parts of the New Testament declare, these miracles were given for the purpose of confirming the word. Hence Stephen had received an extraordinary call to preach the word.

Granted, but keeping in mind that Stephen's call to preach was never recognized officially by the church. We don't find the Apostles ordaining him as an elder upon discovering his gifts. Perhaps, then, we can distill 3 tiers of evangelistic activity:
1. Extraordinary call - Paul, Stephen, Apostles
2. Ecclesiastical office - ordained ministers
3. lay witness

There may be differences in the execution of evangelistic activity within these tiers, but the content (gospel) remains the same.
______
as an aside, we need not be frustrated at the turns and bends that this thread is taking; this is natural in conversation and it's good for these important topics to get worked and reworked through. It is a tribute to the OP poster that his thread spawns multiple conversations. I don't think there's been moderation so far, so we're good.

 

[earl40]

I still have some lingering questions over this whole discussion. I'm very confused by the position of those who say that minister's should be the one's to evangelize. In all the posts, I can't figure out whether laymen are to evangelize or not. I understand the high view of the office of teaching elder, but I'm confused on the duty of of the lay person. Can someone with that point of view clarify the duty of the lay person to evangelize? Is it the duty of the lay person to share the good news of Christ? What is their duty in regard to the unregenerate man?

If you read what I posted above about my own journey from Roman catholic to Protestant and Presbyterian you will see that I was a disallusioned catholic who was simply invited by Protestant friends to a Sunday service at their Protestant church....from there other events folowed....the conversion process for me took several years before I was born again and experinced as Calvin descibes 'a true Protestant conversion"..you people must realize we all evzangelize by simple witness to the Gospel..a simple invitation to the Sunday service led to other classes I TOOK UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF ORDAINED MINISTERS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD IS FOR ALL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE AND WITNESS THE GOSPEL AND HELP LEAD MANY DISALLUSIONED CATHOLICS TO THE RANKS OF THE ELECT AND TO PROTESTANTISM. LET THE REST BE IN NTHE HANDS OF GOD..WE ARE HIS INSTRUMENTS ......

So could you tell me what changed in your view of Jesus and Him dying on the cross before and after your conversion? Sorry if you think this is a hijack but as an former Roman Catholic turned rabid protestant I can not stand to see "the conversion process for me took several years before I was born again and experinced as Calvin descibes 'a true Protestant conversion"".

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I still have some lingering questions over this whole discussion. I'm very confused by the position of those who say that minister's should be the one's to evangelize. In all the posts, I can't figure out whether laymen are to evangelize or not. I understand the high view of the office of teaching elder, but I'm confused on the duty of of the lay person. Can someone with that point of view clarify the duty of the lay person to evangelize? Is it the duty of the lay person to share the good news of Christ? What is their duty in regard to the unregenerate man?

If you read what I posted above about my own journey from Roman catholic to Protestant and Presbyterian you will see that I was a disallusioned catholic who was simply invited by Protestant friends to a Sunday service at their Protestant church....from there other events folowed....the conversion process for me took several years before I was born again and experinced as Calvin descibes 'a true Protestant conversion"..you people must realize we all evzangelize by simple witness to the Gospel..a simple invitation to the Sunday service led to other classes I TOOK UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF ORDAINED MINISTERS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD IS FOR ALL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE AND WITNESS THE GOSPEL AND HELP LEAD MANY DISALLUSIONED CATHOLICS TO THE RANKS OF THE ELECT AND TO PROTESTANTISM. LET THE REST BE IN NTHE HANDS OF GOD..WE ARE HIS INSTRUMENTS ......

So could you tell me what changed in your view of Jesus and Him dying on the cross before and after your conversion? Sorry if you think this is a hijack but as an former Roman Catholic turned rabid protestant I can not stand to see "the conversion process for me took several years before I was born again and experinced as Calvin descibes 'a true Protestant conversion"".

I am not sure his view of Jesus dying changed but what he died for probably changed. Sometimes illumination comes in spurts. Sometimes a fog can hinder a clear view for some. Maybe a cloudy sky keeps the view from being evident. But for some of us God just reveals it suddenly by his mercy and grace. It isn't so with everyone. And if you think Dudley is rabid.... You should have met me 30 years ago. LOL. I drove people nuts.

 

[earl40]

I am not sure his view of Jesus dying changed but what he died for probably changed. Sometimes illumination comes in spurts. Sometimes a fog can hinder a clear view for some. Maybe a cloudy sky keeps the view from being evident. But for some of us God just reveals it suddenly by his mercy and grace. It isn't so with everyone. And if you think Dudley is rabid.... You should have met me 30 years ago. LOL. I drove people nuts.

I guess what bothers me is that I have noticed that most don't pinpoint their conversion until they they grabbed Jesus like a piece of meat out of the freezer. What most do not realize is that once one has a certain amount of understanding of, Who Jesus is and what He did, that was the point of having real faith. What happens is that many, if not all, come to faith in His work and Person and have very little understanding of the content of that faith. Sort of like having a baby learning to speak English and the only word they know is no. That child can speak English though the extent of the child's language is just the word no. No offense meant to any here...just an observation of the "typical protestant mindset" as is usually articulated as "a true protestant conversion".

 

[dudley]

All,

It appears that the OP was about jumping on the opportunity to evangelize the Catholics due to this time of disillusionment among their ranks.

I would say this: It looks like the harvest season may be upon us.

I think there is sufficient cause to strategize and redouble our efforts towards evangelizing Catholics, both in the US and abroad.

For instance, I know of a region here where I work that is almost predominantly Catholic. They bring their idols into the church (wooden carvings) in the name of "culture" and they are wholly biblically illiterate (and almost wholly illiterate in basic reading anyway). We have had 12 villages ask us for an evangelical Gospel witness last year and we sent 2 evangelists...but the doors are still wide open. The workers are few, however, to exploit the open doors.

https://www.crosier.org/default.cfm?PID=1.35.13.1&inq_key=28880&action=detail&LibID=5686

Amen and "ditto" my brother Pergamun. The Catholic has never really known a Christ centered Gospel.....I know I did not untill I became a Protestant and a Presbyterian....and it is possible if we do not evangelize them they will fall into the ranks of the non believers...

 

[dudley]

The following article is excellent if you wish to witness to a disallusioned Catholic. It is written by an ex catholic and now a Presbyterian."Becoming a Presbyterian" « Bagpipe OnlineMay 6, 2000 ... Becoming a Presbyterian. BY THE BAGPIPE STAFF. Matthew Siedhoff Guest writer. Having read Thomas Andreas' article in the last issue of the ...
Becoming a Presbyterian « Bagpipe Online - Cached

---------- Post added at 04:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:36 AM ----------

The harvest is ripe for witnessing to disalusioned catholics ..and not just the priest sex scandal...the caholic church is losing many people...following article is in todays Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Religion Writer Ann Rodgers chronicles the spiritual life of Southwestern Pennsylvanians. The catholic is disalusioned on many levels..form of worship..and the Gospel message and the article is written by a Jesuit Priest.

Interesting analysis of reasons Catholics become Protestants

Monday, April 18, 2011 02:27 PM Written by Ann Rodgers

Father Thomas Reese is a Jesuit political scientist who has devoted much of his scholarly ministry to analyzing the Catholic Church. Now he draws on data from the Pew Religious Landscape Survey to look at the many baptized Catholics who have converted to some form of Protestantism.

Overall he finds that stereotypical reasons -- disagreement with church teaching on sexual morality or revulsion at the sex abuse scandal -- don't fit the reality. There are many



reasons that people leave, he writes, but the unifying factor is that they find the experience of worship in Catholic churches unsatisfying. Father Reese believes that the impending changes to the English liturgy, intended to make it more of a literal translation from the Latin, aren't likely to help this situation.

The principal reasons given by people who leave the church to become Protestant are that their "spiritual needs were not being met" in the Catholic church (71 percent) and they "found a religion they like more" (70 percent). Eighty-one percent of respondents say they joined their new church because they enjoy the religious service and style of worship of their new faith.
In other words, the Catholic church has failed to deliver what people consider fundamental products of religion: spiritual sustenance and a good worship service. And before conservatives blame the new liturgy, only 11 percent of those leaving complained that Catholicism had drifted too far from traditional practices such as the Latin Mass.

His full essay is online at the National Catholic Reporter.

He writes in conclusion:

While the hierarchy worries about literal translations of the Latin text, people are longing for liturgies that touch the heart and emotions. More creativity with the liturgy is needed, and that means more flexibility must be allowed. If you build it, they will come; if you do not, they will find it elsewhere. The changes that will go into effect this Advent will make matters worse, not better.
Second, thanks to Pope Pius XII, Catholic scripture scholars have had decades to produce the best thinking on scripture in the world. That Catholics are leaving to join evangelical churches because of the church teaching on the Bible is a disgrace. Too few homilists explain the scriptures to their people. Few Catholics read the Bible.

The church needs a massive Bible education program. The church needs to acknowledge that understanding the Bible is more important than memorizing the catechism. If we could get Catholics to read the Sunday scripture readings each week before they come to Mass, it would be revolutionary. If you do not read and pray the scriptures, you are not an adult Christian. Catholics who become evangelicals understand this.

Finally, the Pew data shows that two-thirds of Catholics who become Protestants do so before they reach the age of 24. The church must make a preferential option for teenagers and young adults or it will continue to bleed. Programs and liturgies that cater to their needs must take precedence over the complaints of fuddy-duddies and rubrical purists.

Current religious education programs and teen groups appear to have little effect on keeping these folks Catholic, according to the Pew data, although those who attend a Catholic high school do appear to stay at a higher rate. More research is needed to find out what works and what does not.

The Catholic church is hemorrhaging members. It needs to acknowledge this and do more to understand why. Only if we acknowledge the exodus and understand it will we be in a position to do something about it.

 

[MW]

The following article is excellent if you wish to witness to a disallusioned Catholic. It is written by an ex catholic and now a Presbyterian."Becoming a Presbyterian" « Bagpipe OnlineMay 6, 2000 ... Becoming a Presbyterian. BY THE BAGPIPE STAFF. Matthew Siedhoff Guest writer. Having read Thomas Andreas' article in the last issue of the ...
Becoming a Presbyterian « Bagpipe Online - Cached

Dudley, We can be thankful that substantive Christianity derived from a book like Packer's Concise Theology was the reason for the conversion. But then there is this other somewhat subjective and anecdotal evidence based on personal experience. If Protestantism is about anything it is about Jesus Christ and His saving grace. It is "His story," not "my story," that matters. So, if I may offer two words of advice about this idea of "witnessing to disillusioned Catholics," (better termed "Romanists"),

1. Let it be the witness of Jesus Christ and not personal experience.

2. Let it be the perennial subjects which are at issue between Romanist and Reformed catholicism, and not some circumstantial issue which arises from a mere sense of morality.

To which may be added a very important point which has been echoed throughout this thread,

3. Let it be such a witness as gives credence to the creed, I believe in the church.

Blessings!

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I am not sure his view of Jesus dying changed but what he died for probably changed. Sometimes illumination comes in spurts. Sometimes a fog can hinder a clear view for some. Maybe a cloudy sky keeps the view from being evident. But for some of us God just reveals it suddenly by his mercy and grace. It isn't so with everyone. And if you think Dudley is rabid.... You should have met me 30 years ago. LOL. I drove people nuts.

I guess what bothers me is that I have noticed that most don't pinpoint their conversion until they they grabbed Jesus like a piece of meat out of the freezer. What most do not realize is that once one has a certain amount of understanding of, Who Jesus is and what He did, that was the point of having real faith. What happens is that many, if not all, come to faith in His work and Person and have very little understanding of the content of that faith. Sort of like having a baby learning to speak English and the only word they know is no. That child can speak English though the extent of the child's language is just the word no. No offense meant to any here...just an observation of the "typical protestant mindset" as is usually articulated as "a true protestant conversion".

I am not understanding your observation Earl. Regeneration and Conversion might be two separate things. You do understand that I am sure. For a Roman Catholic there is such a thing as a true Protestant conversion if one turns to Christ alone by faith alone. It is a marvelous thing to behold. It is when he realizes the just shall live by faith. And that is a heavy revelation and conversion experience. It is something that one takes hold of. Faith takes hold of something and someone. If it didn't have substance to take hold of it would not be faith and there would be no conversion. The just shall live by faith is a heavy revelation. The Protestant Conversion is much different than the Roman view. Only one of them can be from God. And sometimes that is a process God does incrementally. He can draw us quickly or slowly. Luther's was a slow process. Samuel Rutherford's and others were quick. Mine was quick.

 

[dudley]

Dear Josh, (ChariotsofFire)
I have re-read the posts again before answering you so as to present an accurate understanding of all who have posted from the understanding that only ministers "evangelize". What we're saying is that in the Scriptures the word "evangelize" has a narrow context. This context is that which our Lord gave to His Apostles, (his extraordinary officers) and by extension and application, ordinary officers as well, especially those who labor in word and doctrine. He has given them something He has not given the rest of the folks in Church, the seals of the Kingdom, the Sacraments. These ministers have, from Christ, an authority to bind and loose--to remit and retain, to declare, ministerially and authoritatively, the Evangel of the Kingdom of God, and they are given those seals of authority for that end. As Dudley said above, it was his protestant friends that reached out to him, and invited him to Church. Note that it was his friends that did as Christ told the Gadarene Demoniac--"go and tell what great things the Lord has done for thee". They did. This engendered a willingness in Dudley to begin attending protestant services where, perhaps for the first time in his life, he heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it was proclaimed by a minister of the Gospel, trained, ordained, called, and equipped for that office (that official duty) of speaking for Christ. This Gospel preacher, along with his session and Presbytery, also possessed something Dudley's protestant friends did not have: The authoritative seals (authentication) of that preaching, and when Dudley professed faith, was admitted by those in authority into the Kingdom, the Church of Jesus Christ.

Note that Dudley's friends were acting in a manner consistent with their position--they spoke of their experience, of what the Lord had done for them, they testified to the grace of God as they have perceived and experienced it.
Note that the Pastor was acting in accord with his position and calling. It is no wresting of the Scripture, rather it is consistent, to say that evangelism, or Gospel Preaching, is authoritative, as well as is the administration of the Sacraments. When the minister preaches, and when he administers the sacraments, he is binding and loosing according to his office, using the keys of doctrine and discipline, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edification of the body of Christ.

This understanding does not preclude lay-action, i.e., giving testimony to the grace of God, etc. Neither does it diminish the official acts of those officers the Lord has put into office, for by them in this age, the Lord has chosen to call His people into the fellowship of Christ, and the people who hear them are to listen for the voice of the Shepherd in that preached Word, for those ministers speak *for* Christ, and along with that preaching administer the sacraments, by which they open and shut the gates of the Kingdom.

Rev Todd, I was reading your post and I agree completely with everthing you said concernig my journey from catholicism to Protestantism and becoming a Presbyterian. However when you said the following I say Amen and "Ditto" This engendered a willingness in Dudley to begin attending protestant services where, perhaps for the first time in his life, he heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it was proclaimed by a minister of the Gospel, trained, ordained, called, and equipped for that office (that official duty) of speaking for Christ.

I never heard the Gopel of Chrsit explained and proclaimed from the pulpit untill I became a Protestant and a Presbyterian. The catholic never knows a Christ centered Gospel and never experiences Jesus Christ as the sole mediator between God and man. Thus the catholic never experinces knowing also a personal Jesus who is his savior and redeemer. When I was a catholic we were told that we were receiving Jesus into our body and soul when we received communion, because they believe that the bread wafer becomes the actual body of Christ and the wine becomes his actual blood. However even then I never experienced the closeness I desired to my savior; something was missing. The adoration of a piece of bread also bothered me....I could never really see Jesus in the bread. Then when I became a Protestant I accepted fully the logic of Protestant Memorialism concerning the Lords Supper. I also read how Calvin said we ascend to the Savior in heaven sitting next to His Father and we receive Him in true spirit becuse of our faith in Him alone which is bestowed on me by the grace of God alone. When I receive communion now as a Protestant in the Presbyterian church I experience a bond again with Jesus my Savior that I never experienced receiving communion in the catholic curch. I believe now the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine however I receive Christ completely when I commune as a Presbyterian. Again I think only a former Roman catholic who discovered the true Gospel and true faith of the Reformed Christians and was "born again" can fully appreciate what I am saying. Rev Todd I think you do understand and I thank you for your post..what I experinced was a priveledge I believe and given me by the grace of God ...I experinced like John Calvin and many of the Protestant Reformers who also were catholics 'a true Protestant conversion" I am posting this message in hopes that my fellow PB brothers can understand why I am such a fervent believer in spreading the true Gospel to dialusioned catholics....I know I was one...and if my Protestant friends had not invited me to join them at a Sunday service I may never had discovered the beautiful Reformed faith and I may never have known Jesus my savior as I do now. I may have ended up without any faith and could have been lost...instead I was lost and was found again and converted by "Amazing Grace" and my Protestant friends were the initial instrument acting as witness for the savior and God His Father. I am thankful to God for this gift and I am so proud and thankful to be a Reformed Protestant. I hope my PB brothers can understand what I am saying...

 

[dudley]

The original intent of the Op seems summed up by this sentence;

It may be a time for the Reformed Protestant churches to reach out to any delusioned Catholic at this critical point in church history

Note that churches were addressed and that the main point of the OP was that this is a critical time for churches to be sending the Gospel to Catholics. Thus, Joshua hijacked the thread when he began focusing on who is NOT supposed to evangelize in general, and you have helped keep the thread away from its OP, which was originally about this strategic time in history to mobilize our churches to send people to evangelize Catholics.

I agree with Pergamun and I recently used the following piece from scripture with a catholic friend who is beginning to question Roman Catholicism....said to me what makes you think the catholic church is so wrong and is it because you are simply a Protestant now? I said definitely not …I saw the way to get this person to question all catholic beliefs ..once the catholic in his own mind starts to question catholic beliefs he is open to possible conversion an being born again as a Christian. That is really what happened to me...while taking with my disillusioned catholic friend said …I was reading the following from revelation in my King James version of the bible.

Revelation 22:18-21 (King James Version)
18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
20He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
21The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

He then said to me that’s what the KJV says ..what does the catholic version say… I got out my old catholic study bible and sure enough it says the same….

As an ex Roman Catholic I think that Catholics tend to write off or overlook the warnings in Revelation about adding to or subtracting from the Word of God. And they do not read the bible as we Protestants do. And be sure that the above passage is never read at a Catholic mass when they are doing the liturgy of the word. They do not want the catholic to hear these words…They rely heavily on things the Popes throughout the ages have said or written and they rely on pronouncements / rulings from the Vatican both of which are "extra-Biblical" meaning they add to the Bible.


The fact is that the Catholic church doesn't believe in using the Bible solely for its guidance and direction. I think should be a reference point also in evangelizing disillusioned Catholics…and the piece from revelation opens the path to begin tearing apart all the false catholic teachings which are not biblical….by the way my catholic friend is now questioning many other things when we talk…..hopefully I will steer him to coming with me to a bible class at my Presbyterian church….that will then get him to meet the assistant pastor who is the bible class teacher. At that point the minister can take over..
..

 

[timmopussycat]

"Evangelize" has a strict and narrow meaning in Scripture and to lay such a responsibility upon more persons than the Scriptures do is to lay a burden upon the body of Christ that is not hers universally and to do great harm to the concept of "commission" and "evangelism" as taught in the Word of God.*

My apologies for coming late to this thread.

It appears that Scripture assigns the responsibility of "evangelize" to more persons than church officers alone. In Acts 8:1,4 we read a "great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem and they were all scattered throughout . . . Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. . . " and "those who were scattered went about 'evangelizing' the word." From this passage, some things appear to be clear.
1) The scattering of the Jerusalem church cannot be restricted to its leaders. The persecution is described as "great" targeted "against the church" (not just the apostles, elders or deacons) and the result was "they were all scattered."
2) More than the leaders therefore were involved in the "evangelizing" throughout Judea and Samaria and we later find men who were apparently not leaders in the Jerusalem church being "men of Cyprus and Cyrene" founding the church at Antioch (Acts 11:20).
3) This passage would therefore appear to be referring to every Tom, Dick and Harry of the Jerusalem church evangelizing those they encountered while on the run from Jerusalem.

It doesn't follow however that all would evanglize the same way. Every member evangelism should not equal every member preaching or administering sacraments. One may be gifted and recognized for formal preaching and teaching duties, another may know how to explain the gospel at only the most fundamental level and recount his or her own experience.

 

[Pergamum]

"Evangelize" has a strict and narrow meaning in Scripture and to lay such a responsibility upon more persons than the Scriptures do is to lay a burden upon the body of Christ that is not hers universally and to do great harm to the concept of "commission" and "evangelism" as taught in the Word of God.*

My apologies for coming late to this thread.

It appears that Scripture assigns the responsibility of "evangelize" to more persons than church officers alone. In Acts 8:1,4 we read a "great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem and they were all scattered throughout . . . Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. . . " and "those who were scattered went about 'evangelizing' the word." From this passage, some things appear to be clear.
1) The scattering of the Jerusalem church cannot be restricted to its leaders. The persecution is described as "great" targeted "against the church" (not just the apostles, elders or deacons) and the result was "they were all scattered."
2) More than the leaders therefore were involved in the "evangelizing" throughout Judea and Samaria and we later find men who were apparently not leaders in the Jerusalem church being "men of Cyprus and Cyrene" founding the church at Antioch (Acts 11:20).
3) This passage would therefore appear to be referring to every Tom, Dick and Harry of the Jerusalem church evangelizing those they encountered while on the run from Jerusalem.

It doesn't follow however that all would evanglize the same way. Every member evangelism should not equal every member preaching or administering sacraments. One may be gifted and recognized for formal preaching and teaching duties, another may know how to explain the gospel at only the most fundamental level and recount his or her own experience.

If giving, praying and supporting are counted as aspects of the work (which I think they are), and if the Great Commission was given to the apostles as the basis of the entire church, then the whole church together, through those they designate and support and pray for, are all responsible for the evanglization of Catholics. No Christian can, therefore, say, "That's not my job" but has a vital role to play.

 

[Herald]

nevertheless, for each Christian, insofar as his place and station goes, to pray for his pastor & elders, the ministry of the Word & Sacrament, be salt & light, be ready to give an answer for the hope he has, be excellent in his calling, kind, generous, and speak of the things which Christ has done for him. None of that, however, is the ministry of reconciliation which responsibility belongs to ministers of the Gospel as commissioned to them by the Lord and their proper oversight (sessions, presbyteries, etc.).

While the formal work of evangelism resides with ordained ministers of the gospel that doesn't mean the Holy Spirit cannot grant a person repentance and faith through another's fit witness, through reading the Word, or hearing the Word. If we were to believe that only an ordained minister is to used by God in order for a sinner to brought to life then we both esteem too highly the ministry and too little work of the Spirit.

sent from my most excellent Motorola Atrix.

 

[au5t1n]

It is a duty, nevertheless, for each Christian, insofar as his place and station goes, to pray for his pastor & elders, the ministry of the Word & Sacrament, be salt & light, be ready to give an answer for the hope he has, be excellent in his calling, kind, generous, and speak of the things which Christ has done for him.

And let me just say that anyone who is friends with Josh on Facebook knows that he is no hypocrite, but regularly puts these things into practice. Josh does not say "That's not my job" and never mention Christ. He is constantly giving thanks for blessings and talking about what Christ has done. I am not suggesting that anybody has questioned this, but I just wanted to point out that his position is not one that would lead to Christians being silent before the world.

 

[gordo]

Very interesting discussion. I always struggled with evangelism. Mainly because I saw so many people being "turned off" by poor attempts at evangelism by laypeople. Of course as said above, that does not mean you should hide your faith at all, but live it and share it in hopes of getting people interested enough to come to a service.

What are some good scriptures to share with people in this matter? I know a few Christians who take the calling of evangelism to the extreme, often with undesirable results.

Thanks!

 

[he beholds]

If one is going to assert that it was everyone without exception who went apreachin', then we would have to assert that women and children were also doing so.

I think women and children can also evangelize people. In fact, I probably evangelize my children more than anyone else does.

Edit: Ok, well, you said "apreachin'." I don't preach to my children. But I'm interacting with what the passage said: "evangelizing."