Evangelism is scary for many people, including myself. Many Christians find it difficult to start a discussion on spiritual things. Others fear that they’ll be pummeled with objections to the faith that they don’t know how to answer. Many fear rejection. As a result, we’ve invented new methods of “evangelism” that don’t require us to actually talk to anyone. I’m thinking of “friendship evangelism” and “love evangelism” in particular.
The premise of friendship evangelism (also known as relationship evangelism or lifestyle evangelism) is that people will be attracted to your way of living (your holy behavior, your happiness, how you treat others, etc.), prompting them to ask you what your secret is, and predisposing them to become a Christian. At that point, you share the gospel with them.
While Scripture does teach that the way we live can have an attractional impact on non-Christians (Acts 5:13; 1 Pet 3:1-5,15-17), and while a prior friendship with someone may increase their openness to Jesus, this should not be our only form of evangelism. First, it’s not always true that non-Christians will seek to know more about your faith based solely on your lifestyle (Acts 5:13). And yet, they still need the gospel preached to them. Second, if we limited ourselves to friendship evangelism, we will severely limit the number of people who will become Christians. Even the most social of people have a relatively small circle of friends. Third, the abundance of examples from the gospels and Acts make it clear that Jesus and the early church evangelized the crowds. The vast majority of people they shared the gospel with were complete strangers.
What about “love evangelism?” To be honest, I’ve never heard it called this, but the premise of love evangelism (similar to friendship evangelism) is that non-Christians will want to become Christians as a result of observing Christians’ love for each other, or being the recipient of a Christian’s love. We often express this by saying we “love people into the kingdom.” This view is largely based on Jesus’ statement in John 13:35: “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Notice, however, that this verse says nothing about love as an evangelism strategy/tool. It doesn’t say people will want to become Christians when they see how much love Christians have for one another. It says non-Christians will be able to identify Christians by the love they have for one another. Will some people be attracted to Christianity based on the love Christians have for one another? Sure, some will, but that’s not the point of Jesus’ statement, and that is not promised anywhere in Scripture. Even those who are attracted to Christianity based on Christian love may not inquire more about the Christian faith. We still need to orally preach the gospel to them. Nothing can replace this. Non-Christians may or may not witness Christian love, but all need to hear the gospel nonetheless.
Thinking to Believe 
August 19, 2019 at 1:36 pm
Well, whatever evangelists are doing, it’s not working. Christianity is shrinking at a prodigious rate: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/12/5-key-findings-u-s-religious-landscape/ and https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rolltodisbelieve/2018/11/29/how-many-churches-close-per-year/
LikeLike
August 20, 2019 at 12:48 pm
“and be ready always to give an answer ….” doesn’t mean we are all called to be Evangelists. if you don’t have the gifts and the desire to be an evangelist that’s not your calling. don’t worry —- All of the wheat will be gathered into the barn.
LikeLike
August 22, 2019 at 10:45 am
@sofakingsecular
Unless you know Jason personally, it is uncharitable in the extreme for you to ascribe to him a deliberate attempt at obfuscation. And by my lights, it is inappropriate to restrict the term “Gospel” to the first four books of the New Testament.
According to 1 Cor. 15:1-4, the gospel is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The term “Gospels” is applied to Matthew, Mark, Luke & John because they testify of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. Since Christians understand said term, and since Jason is directing his column to Christians, there is no ambiguity how he is using that word. Moreover, Jason is not saying that a living example is irrelevant to one’s message. He is merely asserting that a verbal witness of Christ is an essential component of evangelism. Even your counter that Jesus “evangelized the crowds without the gospels” doesn’t address the fact that His evangelism included verbal preaching.
The principle of charitable interpretation directs us to construe a person’s argument in its best possible light. That way, we avoid skewering a straw man.
LikeLike
August 23, 2019 at 9:28 am
@sofakingsecular
You write:
How so? Are you saying that the fact I call your post uncharitable I’m abandoning the principle of charity? That doesn’t follow. That appears to state that all judgment in that regard is invalid. We can tell the difference between a charitable construct of an argument and an uncharitable one. You misconstrued Jason’s argument for the reasons I provided. If I have mischaracterized your post, feel free to state why. Otherwise, you’re just making an empty claim.
LikeLike
August 23, 2019 at 10:56 am
Leo, you’ve been banned multiple times. You’re not wanted here, and all you do is clog Jason’s blog with irrelevant material. Please post someplace else.
LikeLike
August 28, 2019 at 2:01 pm
Leo, your replies here illustrate perfectly why you’ve been banned. At first I didn’t know you had come back. For some bizarre reason, you’re obsessed with posting here, even though you know that Jason no longer wants you to. You keep changing your ID in order to keep posting. If you really want to post here, abide by the very minimal rules, and there would be no problem. You won’t do that, so that’s why you’ve been given the boot. Good riddance!
As to what you’ve written, you have typically failed to engage my original arguments and instead got twisted over the fact that I defended Jason. When I recognized that you changed IDs you flipped out to attack me personally. What you think I am has nothing to do with the topic of this post, but you’ve shown long ago that you couldn’t care less what the topic is. Since that’s the case, FIND SOMEPLACE ELSE TO POST. There are myriad sites for you to troll. Your obsession with this one borders on pathological.
In sum, you attacked Jason’s motives without warrant, and part of the problem stems from your ignorance of the biblical term gospel. Christians understand the meaning of said term, and Jason directed his post to Christians on the topic of evangelism. The verses you cite include Christ’s preaching, which is the ultimate point Jason is making. Your criticisms of him are thus without rational justification.
LikeLike