Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Pilger  Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmson worst- the track method, it may be granted that it could use people starting out as a tool to prolaiming the Gospel, but they should not be doing in front of bars, leaving it in bathrooms, or knocking on doors and just giving to people. | It's spelled "tract," by the way. :-)
Why? In principle, this is precisely what Jesus and the apostles did--communicate the truth, i.e., "just giving to people." Quote: |
best way- get into conversations with people about what they believe and why and move that into the Gospel. You can use general revelation to reveal God and his character. This method can take years, but it produces stronger and more firm christians then the track format.
| Any approach that has as its goal the complete, accurate communication of the gospel message is sound. It is the approaches that fall short of that which need to be cautioned against. |
First of all thank you for correcting my spelling error; I make many in here and grammar mistakes, which I have confessed in the past.
“Jesus and the apostles did” NOT “communicate the truth” by sending out tracts and in five minutes or less. They reasoned with the Jews to the truth of the gospel. They were not leaving little notes in the grounds or in the Roman Baths, but communicated the truth by going straight to the masses or with individual people.
The point of this thread was to cover the best and worst methods of doing evangelism and there are good and bad ways to do just that. I just went forth from my own experience and my experience has shown that tracts typical create shallower Christians. The American culture wants everything quick and fast instead of having the time to seriously process the information and make a decision; they should not be manipulated by using a sensational or psychological means of individuals of Finney’s tradition that act on carnal man so that they do not look and count the cost.
Even the Apostle Paul had an approach towards evangelism and we see that clearly in Acts. He would reason with the Jews in the Synagogues first off and then he would he would go to the marketplace, where he may then be invited to speak else where as we see Athens. We also see him working individually and with a family with the Philippian jailer.
The reason why I thought the conversational approach is the best approach is because I have seen more positive results and received more feedback then just going out and proclaiming a message to mass of people. You start them off slowly and explain the basics instead of necessarily using a formula, using their and our experience to shape the message. You should always know your audience before you get into a conversation or preach. You want them to understand what your saying and not go over their head. Nor do you want to be superficial in your approach, for we serve a holy God and should not look at evangelism in a superficial way that some methods implore, such as the giving of tracts on the street corner. They may take one look at the tract and then thrown it on the ground or in the nearest garbage can, that why the word coming forth from the mouth is so important and the normal ordained means of communicating the Gospel.
Does our method or approach matter? Yes, if we believe God is holy and had ordained the means as well as the ends. Does this mean we cannot be creative in proclaiming the message? No, for God in his grace uses us as vessels despite of what we are to communicate his truth, but it should be done in humbleness because we will be giving an account on that day. This means that we should act solely on people emotion and not on their ability to reason or ignore people apologetic questions; especially regarding history, for are claims are historical claims. It is Finney approach of acting on emotions that brings in my option more damage to the Gospel then anything else the world could fire against up. Because emotions can change quickly, unlike logical arguments based upon simple facts. Not only does it bring damage by introducing superficialism, not putting into account the holiness of God, and result into a burnout or a religion of no value towards their sin, but also licentious towards sin and thus creating false converts that think themselves to be Christians, but refuse to repent of their lifestyle because of the type of Gospel they were given.
I do agree we need to be complete and accurate, but part of that process is the ability to answer questions they have, which tracts cannot provide. The Gospel message is to be delivered by us the Church and we must do so by sending a complete sound message.
If you want me to speak more on this I will.