This blog post has been revised and turned into a chapter in The Rethinking Series.
The series includes each book in PDF, Kindle, and Nook formats.
Click here to view the Table of Contents for each book and how to get it
Frank Viola | Beyond Evangelical
Official Blog of Author & Speaker Frank Viola. Digging below the surface and moving beyond the shallows in today's Christianity.
Rethinking Evangelism
House Church vs. Organic Expression
Thank you Frank for not leaving us in our traditions,but causing us to think!
Sweet! Just posting so that I can subscribe via email
WONDERFUL Post! thanks for sharing all of this.
Really Great! Thanks for this post.
Hi Frank,
This is the first time I put my comment here, I sometimes visit your blog
I came accross this (your) posting
I’ve just realised something re: story of Lost Sheep,
Looks like the Shepherd never commanded the 99 to look for the missing one, it doesn’t mention anywhere in the bible that the 99 are held responsible for it either
Correct me if I’am wrong 🙂
And it is the same situation with story of Lost Coin and Prodigal Son
(I know coin and sheep don’t have that ability literally)
If we take from religious lense that say “the great commission is for everyone to fulfill” then the story of Lost Sheep, Lost Coin, and Prodigal Son would have been very different 🙂
From my point of view, bible is consistent from Genesis through Revelation, and there is no room for double standard
Best Regards
Leo
Sydney Australia
Leo: you make an excellent and powerful point, bro. Thanks for the insight.
Hi Frank,
I did read the comments and I actually did not see any scriptureal rebuttal. I did find your thoughts, and I appreciate them! The great commission passage is clearly a command. Period. You can not argue that away. Someone is commanded by the Lord to do something. The greek for “make disciples” in the passage is in the Aorist Active imperative. It is a command to do something and to keep on doing it. In this case, to make disciples. You correctly state that this was given to the 12 apostles who were trained by Jesus himself. If the arguement is that this was only given to them, and is therefore binding upon them or the church only until they died, the arguement is seriously flawed. I believe you stated in one of your replies that the command was still binding on today’s apostles. In other words the command still applies, but only to those who are apostles. I am wondering where it specifically says that in the text?
Let’s make this easy for both of us. Are you actually saying or implying that a disciple of Jesus Christ is under absolutely no binding authorative command from Jesus Christ to share Christ with the lost? That we are free to share him with others or not and it is entirely up to us?
This is your blog, and I do not want to get into an extended debate on this issue. I just want to know the answer!
Following Him together
Jim
Jim: I honestly don’t see how you could have carefully read all the comments when you’ve not dealt with what’s been said. And you’ve misrepresented our arguments.
Your points ignore the narrative. They ignore the story, but instead, interpret Jesus’ words in the light of Moody. Here’s a quick run down:
1. the so-called commission is NOT a command but a prophecy. This has already been established and is supported by the Greek.
2. it was a COMMISSION given to twelve men who Jesus was SENDING. They were “sent ones,” or apostles. And this was their commission/sending. Paul says NOT ALL are sent ones in 1 Corinthians 12. To lift that word out of context and apply it to every believer is to do violence to *the story*. The story of the NT church also makes clear not all are sent ones. Paul and Barnabas were SENT in Acts 13, not the rest of the disciples in Antioch. If you push the apostolic commission on every Christian, you break the Scripture and the narrative. Neither will hold it. Again, not all are sent-ones with an apostolic commission. That doesn’t move.
3. If you insist that the commission is given to every Christian, you have just condemned most every believer in the NT. Because they didn’t go out into all the world. Most of them did not travel at all, but lived and died in their own home-towns.
4. If you insist that the commission is given to every Christian, you have just condemned most every believer today. For most Christians aren’t going into all the world preaching and raising up churches (which is HOW disciples are made. See the next point).
5. We see clearly how the apostles fulfilled the commission. They did it by planting organic expressions of the church. Not by creating discipleship programs or clergy-led “churches” (organizations) which have no biblical root. They fulfilled the commission in what they did (planting ekklesias), and so do contemporary apostles (sent-ones). I prove this in my article on “Discipleship, Mission, and the Church.” A link appears to it in the comments section and on the Most Popular menu.
In short: You’ve not discounted any of the above points in your response, and thus, I find it both weak and unconvincing. Nonetheless, my main point remains. Those of us who are in agreement on this issue have seen far more conversions and transformation through the lives of those who understand the commission the way it’s been set forth here than we have in those who teach that every Christian has an obligation to preach the gospel to lost souls (Moody’s view).
In other words, for us, the proof is in the pudding.
Evangelism in a post-Moody world has taken on a very restricted meaning, and it’s both diluted and narrowed it considerably.
Hi Frank,
I am new to your blog having just found it today!
I think I understand your main point and I agree with you. The only thing I would like to say is that their is a clear command in The Great Commission and it is not the “going” but the “making” . The Apostles were clearly commanded to do something, and the greek structure of that verse leaves no question that it was to make disciples. This disciple making was something that was to be done forever.
Understanding the high cost the Father paid to redeem humanity, it is not a huge assumption to think that this lasting command of making disciples would have authority over every believer. In fact, I think it is a huge assumption to say that this command is only binding on Apostles (the original 12 and those that followed!) We certianly don’t see the early church taking this view. After the stoning of Stephen, the church, not the apostles, were scattered all over the area. Acts 8:4 tells us that those who were scattered, (whoever “those” were, we know that they were not the Apostles,) preached the message of the cross wherever they went. Within 30 years, the message of Jesus had made incredible headway into the known world. I don’t think it is a large stretch whatsoever to connect the two. They understood the message. Early church history attests to this (see the writings of Justin Martyr, Ireneus and Clement of Alexandria).
One could argue that they took the message of Christ to others because they were filled with so much gratitude towards the Savior, or because they were compelled by this command, or both. It is not a big jump to assume it was both! Remember, part of the disciple making process was to teach the new disciples to obey everything Jesus had commanded the Apostles to do.
Now certianly, not all disciples are called to apostolic evangelism/church planting ministry like Paul. But the command to make disciples is a lasting ordinance that has been entrusted to the church. I think you and I would agree on this: those who understand the incredible price that was paid to redeem lost treasonous traitors such as ourselves, don’t need to be commanded to share the gospel whenever God gives us opportunity. It is an honor and a privilege. Yet, the command to make disciples is a command. Jesus entrusted it to His church.
Those are my thoughts. Thanks for your Blog!
Not for Itching Ears: Your comment has already been answered in detail in the comments section. Please read the comments so that (1) you know what we’re actually arguing for and NOT arguing for and (2) you can see the scriptural rebuttal to some of your points.
Glad you like the blog. You can check out the archives at the top. We’ve covered a lot of issues and plan to continue to, God willing.
Hey Frank, I am enjoying your blog and having you put some perspective on my frustrations with the “church”. As to this blog I have to ask….. what does it look like in practice? I go into the Juvenille Hall and work at a crisis pregnancy center. I already conduct it differently than my co-laborers and predecessors. I am truely trying to bring the Word of God to people and teach them how to think (the Word of God is true and answers all questions mankind has) vs believe this or you are doomed, that Jesus is more than an icon of our faith but a personal God to have a deep and fulfilling relationship with.
I have been in the “church” so long that I seriously doubt my ability to cut out the tradition without throwing out the truth. Any help would be appreciated.
Julie: Read the posts “Visiting an Organic Church: A Report” and “What Does an Authentic Organic Church Look Like?” and you’ll have a big part of your answer. Also the message “The Eternal Purpose” paints the picture quite vividly.
Honestly, I’d go as far as to say that attempting to “win” people to Christ often does more harm then good. As Frank pointed with his race track illustration, if a person is only ready to walk 10 steps closer to the starting line – trying to make them run 50 is likely only going to discourage them.
I remember once when I was in college, I was simply being nice to a man who considered himself to be an Atheist. He appreciated it, and was beginning to open up his heart to me. It was a very slow process, but I do believe that it was getting to the point where he might honestly listen to what I had to say about Jesus. Well, a pastor friend of mine caught on to what I was doing and swooped in to “take the situation into the hands of a professional” or whatever. To make a long story short, they ended up getting into a fist fight over it and the man never spoke to me again because he walked away believing that all Christians were pushy and invasive.
Wow. Great point, Donna. Thanks!
Frank, Thanks so much for this post. All I can really do is thank you for clarifying and confirming the words that the Lord has been speaking to me for many years. You are *literally* the first person I’ve heard say anything like what I’ve been thinking. I’m starting to understand that there are very few Christians out there who are willing to embrace the truth.
Is it possible to make a distinction in evangelism? Could we say that the real difference is between passive evangelism (us simply letting our light shine and not covering it with anything) and active evangelism (actually actively seeking to win the lost to Christ)? Both winning people to Christ but one being an active ministry while the other is simply Christian living?
Alex: Yes, I think that every Christian is an evangel and a Jesus Manifest just by following the Lord. I’m not sure I’d call that “passive” evangelism. I’d much prefer to think of it in terms that we show forth Jesus Christ when we truly follow Him. But that can make varied forms. Spoken, living, sharing, serving, etc. The purpose isn’t “winning” people to Jesus (not the best term in my view). But to fulfill God’s ultimate intention.
Two things which I think relate to the discussion are:
The Gray Matrix modification of the Engel Scale, adding attitude as a horizontal axis. Attitude may particularly change within the context of a long term relationship, unconditional love and acceptance, and also areas of Christian service which would not often be labelled ‘evangelism’.
Research Study: How Adults Become Christians confirming your comments, by showing that most adult lasting conversions:
a) took on average over 2 years from the beginning of a Christian journey
b) the biggest factor, by far, was a relationship with a Christian
c) a serious life problem was also a catalyst to starting this journey by asking questions/being open in about 50% of cases
Blessings
Tony
Hi, Frank. I do not push the Great Commission over any of the other commands of Jesus. I do teach and practice obedience to the Word of God as our expression of love for Christ (see John 14 and 15). I disagree with your hermeneutics. When Jesus gave personal commands, like the preparation for the Last Supper or for the blind man in John 9 to go wash in the pool, these instructions/commands were limited in time and space, and obviously so. This is not the case with the Great Commission that is obviously for the followers of Christ until He returns (to the end of the age).
Apostles and teachers have an obligation to teach disciples to obey everything Jesus commanded. I think one is on a very slippery slope when one begins to pick and choose what commands of Jesus will be taught and who should or should not obey them.
We must not error in our reaction to questionable church doctrines like personal evangelism by amending or ignoring the Bible. Deal with the doctrinal error; don’t change what the Bible says. Modern personal evangelism techniques are confrontational, not relational, and result in converts who rarely make other disciples. It’s stressful and not biblical. I don’t teach or do personal evangelism.
The Bible says to make disciples, not to make converts. Making disciples is a loving process of relationship that Jesus demonstrated in his relationship to His Disciples; and that by example and word introduces a person to becoming an obedient disciple-maker. It is non-confrontational and our teams have seen millions of Disciple-makers made and tens of thousands of churches established through this process in some of the most difficult cultural environments on the planet (places where people get killed doing personal evangelism).
Let’s address the error in the personal evangelism doctrine/model rather than change what the Bible commands. If you would like to read more of what I think and teach about personal evangelism, please see .
Blessings!
David Watson
from South Africa
Hi David. Hmmm … I must say that nothing you’ve said here has addressed or refuted anything I wrote in my two responses to you.
I think we’re on a slipperly slope when we take Scripture out of context and use the cut-and-paste method, ignoring all other passages of Scripture which shed light on the other parts. And then claim we’re being “Biblical” by the mere citation of a Biblical text. We also err when we put human tradition above what the Word of God says in its historical context.
Your statement that the Bible says to make disciples not converts is just one example of human tradition violating NT revelation. As I’ve established elsewhere, the disciple vs. convert dichotomy came in with J. N. Darby (19th century). Luke and Paul are very clear that *disciples* and *converts* are the same thing. We err when we separate them. The NT knows no such dichotomy. I’ve established this by Scripture in earlier comments above and did an entire article on it, which has yet to be discounted. (See the link below the post: “Discipleship, Mission, and Church: A Plea to Learn Our History.”)
Also, Jesus said to His *twelve apostles* to make disciples; but how did they do that? They did it by raising up the ekklesia in its ORGANIC EXPRESSION, which is the habitat of every child of God. If you’ve read PAGAN CHRISTIANITY, you are aware that “church” as is commonly used today doesn’t mean what it meant in the first-century.
If we approach the Bible with scissors and glue, we’ll miss this totally. But if we read it in its chronological, historical context, we’ll see it quite clearly.
So we agree: let’s teach what the Bible teaches. 🙂 But that can only be done if we read the NT without traditional lenses and as a narrative, opposed to pasting chapters and verses together.
Frank,
I was saved July 9th 1981 or at least that is the day i realized that all of these non human courses of events lead me to Jesus…
I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE ON YOUR UNDERSTANDING!!!
I was born into a Godless home but as i look back i remember a kindergarten teacher who was so filled with God’s love and would sing Jesus loves me this i know to us. Not till high school when i was an usherette at a broadway playhouse was there another along the way. I developed a crush on a clown who was the lead character in a play called Godspell, having NO CLUE it was about the Gospel even after 14 performances…. I never saw him out of costume but the message drew me to a “crush” on someone?? In College my roommate was a believer and would share to my mostly deaf ears and then the next room mate also …. One night in 1976 i stumbled into the empty basketball arena in Knoxville tennessee just wandering and reading the history on the perimeter walls till i suddenly heard faint voices. I went in to the arena and sat down top row while a small group of kids sat in the first row listening to a young man quietly speaking to them. He was so quiet that it stunned me when the whispers of a new word; “Agape” fell into my ears. I heard each word after that out of this young man named Josh McDowell.
Flunked out of college and went home to work in a hotel at the front desk where could see clearly out the doors to a bellman that seemed to have some sort of glow about him. When i inquired, I was told, “stay away from him! He is a Jesus freak!” Two days later he was training me on the phone system. His name was Jay Walsh and he took me to church and to the park and read the scripture to me for the first time ever! He spent much time and I knew he had something I wanted but….. I continued to read the bible alone in my room in my Godless home. My parents mocked me and called me names because of it. Many evenings doing the same until July 9th, 1981, me and my 75 year old grandmother were taking an evening stroll in my neighborhood and a car pulled up looking for directions. They were quite far off and asked if they could come in for a visit. They were a lovely elderly couple and so I said yes. They came in and we all chatted and then they shared what is knows as Evangelism Explosion “EE” and on this day I was born again and at the starting line alone with my Grandmother. With this being only part there is a powerful worth mention to add… I found out much later that the neighbor i did not know was a Spirit Filled quiet and humble woman of God and was praying for all of us at my house. Ii did not know that until way after she moved away.
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU AS A MATTER OF TESTIMONY AND I KNOW NO OTHER WAY1
my parents physically threw me out of my home at this point and yet now after many years most in my family have come to possess Zoe as well as those along the way who I rarely consider which part of the process they are in…. it’s usually pretty obvious and i find great joy in all of it!!!
The Lord has been fantastically beautiful in granting me the most unusual people, places and situations to proceed in sharing the Power of the Gospel and He is incredibly faithful to translate my heart thru words and just simple comings and goings to those who are being saved!
You are so right!!! Jesus is all in all and there is no formula…. there is only Him formed in us and He is the Gospel we share.
I agree with many points of Frank’s post. Moody did help to reduce both the gospel and its transmission by his analogy of taking lifeboats to sinking planet earth to save “souls” and the beginning of “using” works of service to the poor to get them in the boat. But he was in a long line of forces that contributed to that decline starting somewhere after the second great revival period in America and reaching its fullness after WWII so that we are where we are now…arguing if people need to be intentional about being disciples. It seems to me that Frank’s energy on this and most of the discussion these days in whatever circle, emergent, missional, house church, is misplaced. The whole point of the commission is not who carry’s it to where…apostles or not. It is in the work of immersing people in the contagious life of the Father, Son and Spirit and their ways of life together revealed in Jesus’s instruction for us all, apostle or not. How is that done?
What I do not hear anyone addressing is how you get to become a contagious person or community, or an actual plan for that…how do you engage that life? Apostle or not. (Seems that the lost art of apprenticeship to Jesus by intentional example and imitation that is so clear in scripture (for a few of the many texts try…I Cor. 11:1, I Tim 4:12-16, I Thess. 1:1-10 for a start and then go to this in Jesus, Peter, John, writer of Hebrews) and the training to get that…I Tim 4:7-8 that shows up whenever there is a revival…is the missing link…I don’t see that addressed in Frank’s materials or many others. HOW to you get lit up as an individual or a group? That seems crucial to even an apostle being on fire…the gifting is not the fire…the life one leads is and where it is coming from. (For more…see Dallas Willard’s article on Discipleship in The Oxford Handbook to Evangelical Theology, soon to be released.)
Keith, I suspect you’re new to the blog. The answer to your question is found in my book REIMAGINING CHURCH, which looks at the fellowship of the Godhead on the ground in a practical, live-able way. It’s also contained in the “related links” below the blog post. It all boils down to a revelation of Jesus Christ and learning how to live BY Him in (a kingdom) community. The book JESUS MANIFESTO discloses parts of that revelation, and my blog post today — — is a peak into the actual fruit of it. I’m not a theorist when it comes to this subject. I’m interested in what works on the ground.
Keith,
I have asked myself this same thought although i do agree with Frank on all points…. this is a thought…?
If you or I were the main actor on the movie called “my funeral” and we were in the scene of laying in the open casket while others milled around as they do at funerals…. and then the eulogy and speakers…. what would we hear them say? truth ? nice lies? i dunno…. my real question is what would it feel like laying in a casket alive? knowing that’s inevitable for all of us… Is the passion for life dulled with assumption??? Is the possession of Eternal Life containable??? The miracle of “being born again” so easy to hide or is it that small that we can ask questions on how to share it or when to share it or how we will look if we share it…. Are we spiritually still laying in a coffin as far as the Gospel is concerned?
I will go as far as to say that American Christianity is at risk! It’s different in other countries ….. very different.
I am after many years feeling a pulse once again …the Power of the Gospel unto salvation…. and its was a dark many years! Jesus shows no sign of remorse at my return and I see that he is not wearing a watch….. nor was he checking off the calendar of wasted days….. nor am I anymore
I recently asked a friend, “If what you’re doing now could still be done with or without God’s presence in it, why on earth would you keep doing it?” From my experience, “evangelism” has all too often taken that route. Whether or not the Spirit was drawing I was determined to drag that person to the “starting line” (as per your illustration), and get them “saved”. Then, I could put another notch on my “saved souls” belt. It simply doesn’t work, even in a “relationship”. “Relational Evangelism” is not the answer of the day. It is simply another trick up the Christians proverbial “sleeve”. A bait-and-switch tactic at best.
Rather than “building relationships” with people in oder to evangelize them, I have made friends for the sake of making friends because I like having friends to do life with. When I am focused on Christ and experiencing His life with the Body, I find my conversations naturally overflow with the love of Christ. He is shared verbally and non-verbally through my life. It is Him that evangelizes, not me. When I find my focus in life drifts of the Head, my conversations don’t naturally overflow with Him. To me, and my feeble understanding at this point, it’s just that simple and freeing.
What you have written in your post and the subsequent comments is monumentally misunderstood by much of christendom today. I’m thankful you have the courage and tact to wrestle with such issues in an open way. I also appreciate the comments from those who disagree and bring good points with scripture. I printed this entire discussion (60 pages worth!) and read it all. I have learned, been challenged, and beleive I have received a renewed understanding on this subject.
Yours in the Journey, my friend!
Great point, Frank. I was wondering how a church would be established in a town if everyone was being commanded to go somewhere else and evangelize. To have a stable ekklesia in any place, not everyone can be sent, nor can everyone have the same gifting. And to say that the GC means you should be actively presenting the gospel to everyone wherever you are at is changing the meaning of what Christ said to the 12.
(Note: I am not against sharing Christ. I am all for it as the Spirit leads any believer to do so. But I don’t agree with the evangelism programs being employed by churches today.)
Mark: Thanks for “getting it.” You are right on here. It’s amazing to see just how ingrained Moody’s paradigm has been. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — what’s really working here is the FEAR that if we don’t tell people they must evangelize, they won’t. That’s true if the only thing they know to do is respond to duty and commands. But oh what wonders come with learning to live by Christ!
This discussion really exposes the poverty in the church in this key area.
I’ll say this to every preacher and teacher. If you’ve got to put religious duty, law, and/or guilt on God’s people to motivate them to do anything, then you’re not giving them Jesus Christ.
Thanks for the good post! I am writing because I am curious to hear what you think about David Watson’s thoughts regarding the command to teach the disciples all that Jesus taught them. If Jesus didn’t mean this, then what do you think he meant?
I agree that we don’t use Matthew 28 to guilt people into evangelizing, but I also believe that it is part of the responsibility of every believer. Not all will do it in the same way; we all have different giftedness and roles within the body.
Thanks again for your blog post (and blog in general)!
Mike: I’ve already answered that question. See my two comments after David’s post. Remember: not all are teachers, not all are apostles, not all are evangelists. See 1 Corinthians 12.
Let me make one point point here that will cut to the quick in this entire discussion: If every Christian would learn how to live by the indwelling life of Jesus Christ in Christian community — which IS the CHIEF calling of every believer — all of this other stuff believers bicker over would take care of themselves. Why, then, do we major in all these other things via duty and guilt and MISS the ONE THING that Jesus and the apostles talked so incessantly about . . . and presented it as the root and source of everything else. TO LIVE BY HIS LIFE.
You can teach “discipleship”, “the great commission”, and “evangelism” until doomsday as IT HAS BEEN TAUGHT FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS, but if you miss God’s Eternal Purpose in Christ . . . which is rarely taught or practiced, you’ve missed EVERYTHING.
See the related links below the list for an expansion of this point.
P.S. to my last comment: A point to consider for everyone who is absolutely certain that the so-called “Great Commission” is the obligation and duty of every child of God. A repeat of a former point:
Jesus said to the Twelve that they would be going into all the world. (As previously established, that’s what the word “go” means there in the Greek. Jesus predicated that they would be going.)
The Twelve certainly took the gospel throughout the Roman Empire, mostly in Palestine, and raised up churches. Some went beyond Palestine. So did the other apostles who followed them (Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, etc.)
Now . . . if we’re going to put the Great Commission on the shoulders of every Christian, then that necessary means that:
1) most of the believers in the first-century were disobedient and in sin. Why? because most of them never traveled beyond their own home town. That’s a first-century fact. And there’s no hint that Paul, Peter or James were trying to get the believers to travel all over the world. There’s not a trace of that in their letters. No do they ever mention the commission nor command the saints to evangelize.
2) most Christians today are in sin as they aren’t traveling the whole world preaching the gospel. I remember a very famous Christian musician who before his passing put the Great Commission on every Christian. He said, “you should only stay in this country if God tells you to say. If He hasn’t said stay, then you must go.”
In response, thousands of young people signed up out of duty and guilt to become missionaries and/or to go on missionary trips. And many of them burned out; some aren’t even following the Lord today. They went not out of life, but out of guilt and duty.
Consider these two points in the equation as you affirm that the commission to the Twelve which is repeated to Paul and Barnabas is a call to every believer.
Paul said, “Are all apostles – sent ones?” In 1 Corinthians 12, His answer is “no.”
So the commission that Jesus gave the Twelve applies to all “sent-ones” (apostles) today. But not all are “sent.” That is, not all are apostles.
Hi, Frank. I don’t make it a practice to begin conversations in a blog post, mostly because I am not going to change your mind and you aren’t going to change my mind. But I feel compelled to respond to your post entitled “Rethinking Evangelism”, not because of the content, but because of the style of argument you employed. This is your blog and you can certainly set the ground rules for how people respond. My concern is that the particular method employed in this post has led to many heresies over the ages. I am not saying that your opinion or the content of your blog is heretical. However, the style of argument you employed can lead to heresy over time in lesser leaders’ hands.
The statement that the Great Commission was only intended for the Apostles and apostolic ministry opens the church to arguments I am not sure any of us want to pursue. The Great Commission itself commanded the Apostles to teach Disciples to obey all the commands of Christ that were given to the Apostles. Mt 28:19-20 (NIV) says, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” The words “all” and “everything” are inclusive and apply to the whole church and members of the church. The point is that the Apostles were commissioned to teach all disciples to obey all the commands of Jesus, including those given only to the Apostles. I don’t see any way a classification of believer can be excluded or exempted from the results of this commission or the commission itself. Once we begin to classify to whom we will teach what, we as leaders begin to determine what functions or roles people will have rather that presenting the whole Gospel and allowing the Holy Spirit to work in the life of each Believer through the full counsel of the Word.
For example, if we can say that something was only said to the Apostles and not the church at large, then why can’t we say that Jesus was speaking only to the First Century and not to the Twenty-first Century, regardless of the content/context of the Bible? Or, how about, there is no testimony that musical instruments were used in the First Century church, therefore we should not be using musical instruments in the Twenty-first Century. Or, there is no prohibition in the New Testament regarding the marriage of homosexuals, or the killing of unborn babies, or pluralistic marriages, so these should not be issues for the church, today. Or, there is no direct evidence in the New Testament that churches met anywhere but in homes, therefore real churches only meet in homes, and all other so-called churches are not really church. Or, how about, Jesus did not use cell phones, or amplification equipment, or radio, or the internet, or airplanes, or… (the list is really long), therefore we should not be using these things in ministry today.
On the other side of the coin, Jesus did say in Matthew 5:29-30 (NIV), “If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.” Are we to begin carrying inquisitor’s eyeball hooks and sharpened axes along with our Bibles? “I saw the way you were looking at that woman. Here, let me help you with your problem. You can use my eyeball hook.” (Please forgive the sardonic intent of this paragraph, but sometimes extremes help me to see the end of the road when trying to understand Scripture by extrapolating the logic to conclusion. None of us want to take a legalistic approach to interpreting this passage which is obviously not intended to be taken legalistically.)
Jesus said in John 20:23, “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” Does this mean the Apostles or we have the power to forgive or not forgive individuals? I don’t have the time or space to exegete this passage here, but I don’t think a legalistic interpretation that disregards the literal intent of this passage does it justice. By legalistic I mean obedience to a passage without regard to the literary intent of the author. By literal I mean including the literary intent of the author in the explanation and/or exegesis of the passage.
The legalistic method of interpretation you employed in your argument in regard to the Great Commission can be dangerous. The nature of God, the nature of man, the intent of the original author, the literary style used, as well as the commands and guiding principles of Scripture should all be a part of our understanding, interpretation and practice of Scripture.
When Jesus told His Disciples to go and make Disciples of all nations, most of the nations, ethnic groups and languages on our planet did not exist in the forms we find today. Does this negate the command? Should those individuals identified in apostolic roles only take the Gospel to the peoples directly defined in the Bible during the time of Jesus?
When Jesus commanded His Disciples to go and make Disciples, they knew exactly what He meant. The Gospels are a handbook of Jesus’ disciple-making practices and methods. He had just spent three years choosing them and others, and by example and word, making them disciples. The very nature of a disciple is to make more disciples. Jesus said, “As the Father has sent me I am sending you.” (John 20:21) If one makes disciples for Jesus, then those disciples are going to make more disciples which will include apostles and others in various roles/functions throughout the church and the ages. That’s the nature of being a disciple. They will use their life examples and the Word to do so, because this is what Jesus did and what He commanded. Paul wrote:
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11 NIV)
I don’t think this was written to just the Philippians. It was written to all Believers in all ages. Can we have the attitude of Jesus and not make Disciples?
Not every disciple may be directly involved in obeying the fullness of the Great Commission, but every disciple is responsible to make sure it is obeyed by the church (which is part of your argument), and when and where possible, to obey it themselves. Making disciples is not an option. Jesus modeled it and He commanded it. To limit this command to one classification of Follower opens the door to much error. Who decides what, when and where a command will be obeyed. Who decides when Jesus is using hyperbole or allegory in His preaching or teaching, and how will it be decided? This is the place of Godly leaders in spiritual and scholastic peer consultation and review.
You have a mighty voice in the church, Frank. Please be careful how you use it.
By the way, if you read my blog, you know I don’t subscribe to or teach “personal evangelism” as practiced by most of the church. I also think that “convert” is about religion and “disciple” is about relationship to Christ. I am 100% sold out to disciple-making by teaching, training, coaching, and mentoring disciple-makers through life example and obedience to the Word.
Eph 5:15-21 (NIV).
Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord’s will is. Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Blessings!
David Watson
from South Africa
David: thanks for writing. A very long post, indeed.
Most of what you have said here has already been answered in the comments section. But let me add a few thoughts for you to prayerfully consider.
1. I’m quite familiar with church history and cannot recall one “heresy” that emerged as the result of anything I’ve written in this post. Your post seems to imply that if a person doesn’t make every Christian obligated out of duty to obey the great commission they won’t make disciples. That’s a fallacy.
2. There are quite a few examples of Jesus commanding the disciples to do things that don’t apply to every believer. Just look at the commands surrounding the preparation for the last supper. Also, it fails to take into consideration that the “commission” was Jesus commissioning/sending the apostles. Just as He did with Paul of Tarsus (when He commissioned Saul that specific commission wasn’t to every believer, was it?). And just as the Spirit did with Paul and Barnabas (there were 3 other men in that prayer meeting who weren’t commissioned. This cannot be ignored.) See my recent comment on this.
David, we can prove anything with a cut-and-paste approach to the NT. But it takes on new meaning when we read THE STORY that’s found in the NT. Context and chronology make all the difference. My “method” of interpretation is to take the NT as a flowing narrative which brings historical context to bear. That doesn’t create heresy, it prevents it. For only then can we see the Divine patterns emerge. (I’ve argued this and laid it out in “The Untold Story of the New Testament Church.”)
3. I’ve been a believer a very long time and I’ve been involved in many churches, denominations, movements, and para church organizations. And I’ve seen more *genuine* and *long-lasting* conversions in, through, and among believing communities and ministries that DID NOT hammer the so-called Great Commission away at God’s people, but instead saturated them with a revelation of Jesus Christ and taught God’s people how to LIVE BY HIS LIFE and EXPRESS HIS RICHES in a vibrant experience of ekklesia under the Headship of Christ. To my mind, arguing points and theories falls sway to experience.
4. I’ve seen more “laymen” (so-called) baptizing converts than I have in any church that pushed the so-called Great Commission down God’s people’s throats. In the latter, typically the clergy does the baptizing. The commission is upon the shoulders of apostles, but each believer has the right and privilege to baptize and administer the Lord’s supper. To relegate those to the clergy class is in fact heresy.
5. I find it interesting, and sad, that my opening example has been ignored, glossed over, perhaps “approved” ? by those who seem to want everyone to follow the so-called Great Commission out of religious duty, and the great many comments by people on this blog who have expressed deliverance from the bondage of guilt in this area and freedom to share Jesus Christ is also ignored.
A lot of this comes down to preaching religious duty and guilt vs. preaching and teaching (practically) how to live by an indwelling Lord. As for me, I’ll always opt for the latter having lived in, experienced, and observed both.
A point to consider for everyone who is absolutely certain that the so-called “Great Commission” is the obligation and duty of every child of God.
Jesus said to the Twelve that they would be going into all the world. (As previously established, that’s what the word “go” means there in the Greek. Jesus predicated that they would be going.)
The Twelve certainly took the gospel throughout the Roman Empire, mostly in Palestine, and raised up churches. Some went beyond Palestine. So did the other apostles who followed them (Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, etc.)
Now . . . if we’re going to put the Great Commission on the shoulders of every Christian, then that necessary means that:
1) most of the believers in the first-century were disobedient and in sin. Why? because most of them never traveled beyond their own home town. That’s a first-century fact. And there’s no hint that Paul, Peter or James were trying to get the believers to travel all over the world. There’s not a trace of that in their letters. No do they ever mention the commission nor command the saints to evangelize.
2) most Christians today are in sin as they aren’t traveling the whole world preaching the gospel. I remember a very famous Christian musician who before his passing put the Great Commission on every Christian. He said, “you should only stay in this country if God tells you to say. If He hasn’t said stay, then you must go.”
In response, thousands of young people signed up out of duty and guilt to become missionaries and/or to go on missionary trips. And many of them burned out; some aren’t even following the Lord today. They went not out of life, but out of guilt and duty.
Consider these two points in the equation as you affirm that the commission to the Twelve which is repeated to Paul and Barnabas is a call to every believer.
Paul said, “Are all apostles – sent ones?” In 1 Corinthians 12, His answer is “no.”
So the commission that Jesus gave the Twelve applies to all “sent-ones” (apostles) today. But not all are “sent.” That is, not all are apostles.
David, I just read your comment because someone referred me to it. I thought Frank’s response to you refuted everything you said here. I noticed you didn’t respond to Frank’s refutation, so I guess you probably see his point. thanks.
Thanks for the post. I have believed this way (but not as “summed up” as you :)) for many years without direct Biblical proof (proof texts). Thank you for your succinct points. Not to derail your post, but this topic and the 1800-ish teaching of pre-trib have been on my heart a LOT lately. (I’ve been reading a lot of the 19th century authors Christian authors lately) Maybe if the Lord prompts, you can summarize your take on the latter topic. Peace out, brother.
Your observations are fascinating; I felt as though they were echoing a journal entry that I made several months ago. I am a missionary in Guatemala currently attending a large church and now feeling increasingly out of place, and uncomfortable with the pushy views here on “evangelism”. (And also longing for a more organic experience of “church” which I have yet to find or plant here.)
What a shame that the word “evangelism” has become so twisted. Many of us, as you also, have begun to use words that actually express their meanings rather than religious “christianized” terms, for example “shepherd” rather than “pastor”, “ekklesia” rather than “church”, etc. The problem is that there isn’t a good single verb to substitute for “evangelize” (at least I haven’t found one yet), so we go on using it with all of the meanings that have been tacked on throughout the centuries. The way I see it, the evangel is the gospel, which simply means good news. In that way, you could say that we all should be evangelists; meaning that what we share, however we do it, should be good news.
I am constantly drawn to Luke 4:18-19 as a model for our message. Whatever our calling may be, this good news incarnate in our life, witness, and selfless service to our fellow man will draw people to Jesus. Good-bye to guilt, gimmicks, and programs.
Keep on kicking those sacred cows. I appreciate you.
Frank, this point you wrote jumped out at me: “God’s people won’t be found trying to sell something to others that they themselves haven’t been utterly sold on.” How true this has been in my life.
About twenty years ago, I was a student in a campus ministry where I learned two things: how to live in community, and how to “share my faith” with initiative. The community was my first real taste of ekklesia — powerful. But in evangelism, God let me fail. Hard. I initiated maybe a hundred conversations trying to share the gospel and tried it all — surveys, door knocking, being “friends” with people. I did have some “success” in international missions trips where genuine revival was taking place, and every third or fourth person received Christ.
But in the USA, I’ve only seen three people come to Christ through anything I’ve been involved in. All three times, it was when someone sat in on one of our small group meetings. As close-knit brothers (or brothers and sisters the third time) we shared with one another the love of God, expressed thanksgiving for the grace we had received, and the community of Jesus’ body was evident in our midst. In all three cases, the person proclaimed, “I’ve seen God. This is what I’m looking for.” Only then did my evangelism training do any good, walking that person through a prayer of repentance. In none of those cases did I set out to lead someone to Christ.
I think God let me “fail” precisely so I could understand the principles in your post. Had I been a successful evangelist or missionary, you can know I would have piled the guilt on the rest of the body of Christ. Instead, He had bigger things for me: be a part of the body of Christ. (That’s bigger? You bet it is.)
As much as i love the concept of our mission being Gods eternal purpose… it just seems to me we each tend to live out and communicate what we have interpreted that to be.
Reality as I understand it is that He is working all things after the council of his own will which is not subject to however much or little i understand of his purposes. ephesians 1:11
This is humbling because it reminds me i only see in part and even if i see a lot my influence is tiny compared to what He is doing.
So I thank God more and more people are seeing into His eternal purpose and how it relates to them, but I also thank God He is not limited by our teaching on the subject because this subject is covered under a lot of traditional and religious dust.
Like the salvation message I can agree with the heart of it in my many christian brothers and sisters even though I disagree with key theology and interpretation.
shalom.
John: Good point. Christians cannot just make the eternal purpose whatever they wish. I know a good number of missional folk who have no idea what it is. And they are pursuing other things. If we truly love the Lord, we have to be concerned with His eternal purpose. For it’s what drives our God.
Frank, this really resonates with me. I asked the Lord over several years what He wanted me to do, and kept on getting “Why?” back! This finally devolved into the question of all the unsaved, and my duty regarding them. And then He patiently told me, “I don’t want your duty. I don’t want you for what you can give Me. I didn’t save you in order to get others saved. I want YOU. YOU are the sole purpose of my life’s plans for you. Never mind all the people who need saving (for now – or ever, until you get this). I want to save them for the same reason that I want YOU. You are not less important to me than ANY OTHER PERSON, OR PLAN I HAVE ON THIS EARTH. You – and each and every person – are the pinnacle of my purpose. I want YOU. And yes, we may do things together once I have you. We will. But my highest plans and purposes for you will have been fulfilled, once I have YOU. I LOVE YOU. You and all people are my highest desire. You will have fulfilled your highest purpose in this life, if you spend time with Me. Be with Me, and I will be well satisfied. Let us talk of other things later, when you are used to being all Mine. And then, I will do the works. They will flow out of our Love.”
Now when I hear that God loves me, I know it. It’s not just a universal love. It’s an INDIVIDUAL love. Evangelism is not a program, it’s the love of His Body. And it is only out of this Love that any good works can come, and they will be His works, His fruit, not ours. Our highest calling is to be in love with God.
I just wanted to share this experience with you (even though I have no Biblical support for it) because it made so much sense to me.
Thanks Anthony.
It’s interesting to observe the filters that come with this issue.
For instance, I’ve argued that the so-called Great Commission is a perpetual commission in the sense that it’s upon all apostolic workers. The Father sent the Son (who was the first “sent one” or apostle as He’s called in Hebrews). Then the Son sent the Twelve. Then the Spirit sent Paul and Barnabas and other apostolic workers. So the commission must be understand in that light. (I trace the pattern in FINDING ORGANIC CHURCH.)
Those who read this post through evangelical filters mis-assume that I and others are saying that the apostolic commission that Jesus gave to the Twelve has ended. Wrong.
Second, the organic expression of the church (which is the only church the NT knows) is missional but in the sense that THE MISSION IS GOD’S ETERNAL PURPOSE.
Those who read this post through evangelical filters mis-assume that I and others are not missional. Wrong again. We see the mission as far beyond saving lost souls or making *individual* disciples. FROM ETERNITY TO HERE has been hailed as a classic missional work by many contemporary missional leaders (http://https://www.frankviola.org/frometernitytohere/).
All of this manifests itself on the ground in the realm of the shallow vs. the deep / pursuing “things” vs. Jesus Christ / religious duty vs. the Lord’s life / the mechanical vs. spiritual reality.
Great insights! I agree.
One more point: The active working of the Holy Spirit is the key to genuine evangelism. Jesus said that none can come to Him unless the Holy Spirit draw them. It is so important for believers to be Spirit-led in their interaction with others.
The first link at the bottom of the post, “The Eternal Purpose,” is an important follow-up to this post. Without an understanding of God’s eternal purpose, a lot of this discussion will be difficult to grasp.
Chase: helpful thoughts, bro.
Bob: I think the best summary of what I believe is found in the post “What is an Organic Church? A Plea for Clarity.” See the archives, very top menu.
Frank,
I know this is spiritualizing Genesis 1:28, but don’t you feel like the first command to be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it is directly in line with the Great Commission?
Sean: I think it’s a great description of the principle of life producing fruit. And that’s largely my point. LIFE is what produces fruit and multiplies. What we do in the flesh, even the religious flesh, doesn’t produce lasting fruit and has no eternal value. This is what the ekklesia does organically and naturally when she’s living by the LIFE of Christ. Not religious duty, but life. Living by His life.
re: ‘great’ commission, i think we should not hinge any central teaching on one portion of scripture, we should see it repeated throughout scripture. It should be on jesus and pauls lips very often if it is core and something we all must focus on obeying.
Personally i just dont see that when i read gospels and epistles. Yes it is important but its clear to me its a byproduct of our walk with jesus not something central all believers must go after at all times.
This is a hard pill to swallow but as far as I can see looking at bible history God was extremely patient in his outworkings… modern history confirms this as well seeing that we don’t see revival everywhere. That liberates me to just go with what God is saying to me now and not feel like i’m failing if i’m not trying to reach as many people as possible each and every minute.
I like what was said about the theme of LIFE in jesus’s teachings… i see that all over the NT… if we focus on that as something central its going to naturally have an outworking to others.
I have no problem with evangelists exhorting and encouraging others to share their faith, just like teachers encourage others to teach and write, or prophets to prophesy… it is absolutely natural for us to influence others based on what is real and important to us… its only when guilt, condemnation and obligation are attached that it gets out of whack.
John: Great points. Very insightful.
I have a lot to share and am trying to juice it down here. When I came to the Lord I was so dramatically changed coming out of a rough life and being melted by God’s mercy that I couldn’t help but share His love with others. This was out of a burden and a desire to share the new freedom I found. As time went on I got involved with evangelism at an outreach ministry in downtown Grand Rapids, MI. I eventually became a leader there. At that time I went to a large church of 6000 members and this outreach was assoc. with it. It always boggled my mind that only a handful of us from so many were even willing to go down and share the gospel on the streets. We studied many ways to evangelize and gave out tracks, open air preaching, house to house, food, etc… Later I felt that how can we just bring these people to Christ and then leave them. I began having a burden for discipleship but that format we had it was basically reduced to preaching and teaching once a week. At best this helped those who were saved to reinforce their decision for Christ. During this time I felt that fruitfulness had to do with how many being saved, discipled, etc.. To refer to Frank’s example of the race I found that most of the times I shared with people either at college or bus stop or wherever was just one person being interested in someone else and sharing Christ out of genuine love. I have come to understand the results are God’s and whatever we do is of faith being an instrument for Him and not trying to get a notch in the belt. A lot of so called evangelism that I saw most people do at that large church and others I have been a part of was the come to my church and leaving the rest to the program or minister hoping the people felt comfortable and liked the music or whatever, then eventually if they came for a while they would get to know the gospel and give their lives to Christ. Now I see it as Frank has put it, evangelism is not about getting them to pray a prayer or get a ticket out of hell and to heaven. If you can convince them that those realities are true then naturally they will want to pray the prayer and invite Jesus into their hearts. But when someone comes to Christ they are leaving the world behind and coming into Christ and joining the family of God the community of the saints. Sadly this really can’t take place according to God’s eternal purpose in an institutional setting. So that leads to the reality that the ecclesia is not just the greatest witness of Christ but the only place of refuge from this world. When we come into Christ we come into His body. Now I realize that trying to convince someone of 4 spiritual laws or that they are empty and need Jesus to fill the void or whatever approach is used isn’t going to transfer life per se. When an evangelist or any other believer is saturated with a revelation of Christ and is living it out with others in community and they share Christ who is the gospel, a transfer of life takes place and it is up to the Holy Spirit to convict them and draw them to Christ. It is a work of faith and it happens organically. It is not something we manufacture. A statement that Frank said in a comment above “It’s amazing to me that some people think that if you talk about sharing Christ by the Spirit instead of by guilt, duty, or obligation, that you are against evangelism. It’s truly incredible.” This really speaks to the issue at hand. We are talking about God getting what He wants not about us trying to just please God by making sure we are doing this, this and this. It is about His life and His life having expression through us and this happens organically when we are living by Him, not by a set of mandates.
Again, when someone is born again it is just the beginning. They need a family of saints to nurture them and a place that that happens organically as Christ expresses Himself through each member. Whether it is evangelism or discipleship it must be Christ by the Spirit and not just us trying to do for God out of our own effort whether it be fueled with guilt, compulsion, spiritual pride, etc… The long term goal is Christ and His fullness in His saints as the all in all. (sorry for the long post- hope it makes it past the blog manager’s filter 😉
Frank,
I too am willing to agree to disagree on the point of the Great Commission. I do appreciate your willingness to engage and the manner in which you do so. I hope one day to speak with you in person. As for the effects of our ministry through the Lord’s power on the communities in the region, I extend a personal invitation to you to come and experience and see what the Lord has done and continues to do.
I remain convicted that the Making of Disciples is the honor of every believer, but respect your convictions as well.
Now, on to the next topic …
Miguel: Thanks. This discussion is not unlike the exchange that Neil Cole and I had not too long ago. I think it’s important to underscore the fact that disciples are certainly made in the work that my co-workers and I are involved with. But more, spiritual transformation takes place at a very deep level as well. And the expression of it is intensely corporate not just individualistic. I think the main difference at the root of this discussion is *how* that takes place, what it looks like on the ground (the expression), and for what reason.
Blessings on your work.
Frank,
Thanks for your endorsement of my ministry and your recognition that I apparently understand the base for your teachings.
It might help to clarify what you are teaching in all of your books and articles to summarize it somewhat like this:
The “ekklesia” is the gathered group of individuals whose particular natures and functions have been dynamically created into an “organic” body that has all of its vital work directed and coordinated by one glorious Head with each of its organs and cells created and nourished by one pure Spirit for the expression and completion of the one eternal divine work of establishing a loving “family” for God, the Father.
No gathered group of individuals can clearly be identified as the perfect “ekklesia” or final divine “family”, but those that are not being directed by the Head and are not being nourished by the Spirit are not living or functioning as healthy “organic” bodies, regardless of what they are called or where they meet. And no single “organ” in the body can complete the work of the body by itself, and it cannot function on its own apart from the body. The best thing that any one organ or cell in the “body” can do is to allow the nourishing and energizing benefits of the “blood” (the Spirit) to flow through it in complete surrender to the authority of the Head without it trying to be or to do what it was not created or expected to do. In this way the “ekklesia” can participate with God in his eternal work and even those outside of the “body” can see His glory!
I hope that this summary is somewhat helpful to your readers. It helps me to see it in this way.
Sean: There’s nothing in my post about “replacement theology.” The third from the last point of the post simply echoes the NT that the church fulfills what Israel was called to be, but failed. Namely, to be a light to all the nations, to be the boundary between heaven and earth, to be God’s people in and for the world, to be a kingdom of priests, etc. That’s all.
A quick observation. In my experience, the preachers and teachers who centered on evangelism, and preached the gospel of “if you’re saved, your purpose for living is to get others saved” would strongly argue that we need to obey the so-called Great Commission because Jesus said it. Yet at the same time, they give very little to no air play to one of the *core* teachings of Jesus that’s repeated all over the Gospels . . . which was LIFE, and more specifically, living by His LIFE. This is neglected despite the fact that living by the LIFE of Christ is the very source and foundation for everything else that He taught, and it’s reaffirmed all throughout the NT epistles.
For more on this, see “Living by the Indwelling life of Christ”: http://ptmin.podbean.com/e/living-by-the-indwelling-life-of-christ/
Frank,
On the contrary, I think God is a perfectly logical God. Augustine, answered this question. Augustine explained that logic is not an invention of pagan philosophers, as some men objected, but a science which man has learned from God.
“…The validity of logical sequences is not a thing devised by men, but is observed and noted by them…. …It exists eternally in the reason of things, and has its origin with God. Logic is not a dubious non-Christian method of reasoning. All of the fundamental laws of logic can be found in the Bible.”
My original propositions are not, non sequiter. You may, from your understanding of what I said, suggest that it is “argumentum ad ignorantiam,” or appeal to ignorance. But it is not that either.
Let me propose my basic proposition again which has yet to shown to be invalid.
Jesus commanded the 11 to go an make disciples. Part of making disciples is to teach them to observe all that He commanded. Going and Making Disciples is one of his commandments. Therefore any disciple that is made must not only make disciples, but teach others to do so as well.
It is therefore, necessarily and logically (not Aristotelian) perpetual.
By the way, Jesus uses logic in the Great Commission itself when he says “All authority has been given to me, “THEREFORE,” go and make disciples. We certainly would not want to accuse Jesus of being Aristotelian. If anything we can credit Aristotle with apprehending Jesus the Logos.
Granted, there are many things which are spiritually discerned, but those things which are understood via the Spirit are still logically deduced. Your consistent and much appreciated call to get people to read the Scriptures chrono-logically points this out.
God is a God of reason. “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.”
Even in a Narrative Chrono-logical reading of any text, the basic rules of logic apply.
There are many people who have commented here and I am sure there are minds much more capable than my own and yet no one has shown that the proposition I have made is invalid.
One other issue. Guilt, duty, and obligation are not always bad, but like any other feeling or compulsion, they must be taken captive and subjected to Christ.
In Him,
Miguel
Miguel: This is way off the subject, but just a few thoughts. Aristotle is regarded as the father of Western logic. There’s inductive and deductive logic. I taught philosophy for years and this is well documented. What I’ve discovered is that spiritual truth is paradoxical. Jesus being divine and human, in time and outside of time and space at the same moment, being the Alpha and Omega at the same non-time, these all defy the rules of Aristotelian logic. You can’t have two things that contradict one another both be true, so says Aristotle. Christianity is an eastern faith if you please, it didn’t originate in Greece. The Hebrew mind which is behind the Scriptures can embrace two mutually opposing ideas at the same time and be propelled by them instead of being stuck by them. Light is a great example of the paradoxical nature of divine truth. Light is a wave. But light is also a particle. A paradox, indeed. The whole Calvinist vs. Arminian debate is rooted in the attempt to understand spiritual truth by the rules of Aristotelian logic. All theological systems come from this same tree. But both leave certain Scriptures unresolved. They have to be forced to fit the theological system. I’ve discovered over the years that logic is useful for disproving an idea . . . sometimes. But in terms of giving one revelation and spiritual insight, it’s rather unhelpful. Anyways, that probably deserves another whole post. So I’ll just leave it there.
I have no burden to continue to argue the point re: the great commission as I don’t see it being profitable right now. I think we disagree on that point of Scripture at the moment, and I believe that myself and others have made points that haven’t been satisfactory addressed. And you obviously feel the same on your end. But that’s okay with me. Perhaps 10 years from now we’ll both see the issue differently. 🙂 I’m more interested in my latter statements regarding what’s actually working on the ground with respect a revelation of Jesus Christ and living by His life corporately. I hope that this is happening in your ministry. And if not, I hope that one day it will.
Thanks again for participating in the conversation. ‘Tis appreciated, bro. 😉 Blessings on your work for the Lord.
I like many of your thoughts, extremely thought out.
However, people don’t just look through Moody, It is also through the lenses of John Wesley and Charles Finney who to an extent preceded Moody. It goes back to a “man centered theology” vs. a “God centered” one. Monergism vs. Synergism. History repeats itself and we think we have discovered something new.
As we grow in Christ we see It’s not about us, But about a Glorious God who is glorious regardless of our attempts to do things right.
“There is sometimes somewhat in preaching that cannot be ascribed either to matter or expression, and cannot be described what it is, or from whence it cometh, but with a sweet violence it pierceth into the heart and affections and comes immediately from the Word; but if there be any way to obtain such a thing, it is by the heavenly disposition of the speaker.” an old, renowned Scotch preacher
So we preach not out of compulsion, or necessity but out of Holy fervor, and Unction to rightly describe the Eternaly Perfect, All sufficient, never diminishing One: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
John L: I like what you write here. Moody is the one who popularized the idea of God’s purpose is to save souls, and that’s the purpose/mission of every Christian. He didn’t see the Mission of God, which is His eternal purpose. George Whitefield was probably the strongest predecessor in this. There’s a section in “Pagan Christianity” where this is discussed.
Frank,
Again, the church is NOT Israel, this is replacement theology.
Would you like to reconsider.
Also making disciples should not come as an obligation, rather as our inheritance as sons and princes in the kingdom called to reign.
We reign and establish His kingdom through making disciples.
Guilt is good. When did we buy into the idea that guilt is bad? I think the most destructive quote ever was, “Always share the Gospel and use words if you must,” poor paraphrase. I can’t remember the Italian saints name but his quote has plagued the church for years. We must fear God, not people, then we won’t be plagued by “guilt”. Guilt, if you are a Christian, points to sin. If you sin, you confess and then you have no more guilt.
Chris: Jesus Christ removed our guilt and shame. There’s a huge difference between guilt/condemnation and the enlightenment/conviction of the Spirit. But there is no condemnation in Christ Jesus and the consciousness of sins has been removed from the believer by His blood (one of the main arguments in Hebrews). I’m sorry to see that you believe guilt is good. You haven’t lived until your conscience has been cleansed and you’re free in Christ to love Him freely. I suggest you read Classic Christianity & The Misunderstood God & The Normal Christian Life from our must-read library: http://www.ptmin.org/library – they just may change your life.
Frank-
I am a little late to the party but I have read the post… and almost all the comments….two hours latter I have a thought..;)
Your last thoughts (in the primary post) bring it home for me.
As I personaly have been facinated by Gods eternal purpose and the supremacy of Jesus in all things
(for you scholars that would be a reference from Brother Pauls letter to the Brothers and Sisters in Colossae and it was for the community 😉 my thoughts on evangelism changed to mirror the forrest and track picture as well.
I mean just think what would happen if millions of sincere christians ceased to “try” and dedicate thier lives to “saving souls” or using “evangelism” as a gauge of fruitfulness?
Or what if they lost the “man centered” mental filter that skews our views of Gods eternal purpose..
( that you and Rod discussed lightly above)
I assume they might feel a void of purpose and direction as I did and wonder “what shall I be occupied with now?”
“…and the THINGS of the earth AND CHRISTIANITY grow strangly dim in the light of His glorious Face.” …yes I did change the words…a little 🙂
I like, and “I’ll be back”….
Some good points and I largely agree. I have a few questions, though.
Is it possible you’re making a bit of a caricature of Moody’s “evangelical work”? His charitable and generous financial and social efforts toward helping city life in Chicago and creating opportunities for discipleship and education in Scripture, I think, show a relational and discipleship-oriented side. When one of his “first converts” later introduced himself to Moody, he responded to say, “And what have you done since?” Not, “How many have you saved since?” Though Moody had a strong background in advertising and it never left his personality, I don’t see him as a non-relational man of numbers.
I am very much against, as you seem to be, a non-relational, duty-felt, numbers-based form of evangelism. I believe in a more aura-based form of which you speak (in which case, all-Christian evangelism is not a call as it is an natural and inadvertent event). As for the need to evangelize, what are we to make of 1 Tim 2, where Paul expresses God’s desire for “all men” to be saved?
What I worry about is that downplaying evangelism’s importance in the life of a Christian, deeming it as only for marked opportunities and for the called and qualified, will lead to (or continue, in most the churches I’ve served) a lethargy in the church. “I don’t need to talk about my faith or beliefs. I’m no pastor. It’s all in God’s hands anyway whether my friend goes to hell.”
Granted, evangelism should be an inadvertent and natural occurrence that flows out of the lifestyle of the mature Christian. We could argue a lot of other topics to put in that list where the American Church still falls short: charity, financial giving to the Church, moral purity, etc. How do we go about changing hearts? Can any form of rebuke ever be involved, or is it all-considered guilt-tripping?
Also, while the truth of the Gospel itself, the work of the Spirit and the contagious lifestyle of the mature Christian are transcendent, are there allowances for additional methods of evangelism and discipleship, due to culture and plausibility?
JimCLive: thanks for the comment. Two quick thoughts — 1. My comments about Moody have to do with his revivalist theology which makes salvation God’s mission and goal (see the link in that section for more details). Not for other things he did. 2. Yep, Paul says he wishes all men to be saved, and Peter says God wishes none to perish. I’m not sure what that has to do with anything I wrote in the post.
It’s funny how horribly ingrained some of these ideas about evangelism has been. It’s been pounded into our heads so much that *any* deviation from them is viewed as being anti-missional or anti-evangelistic. But what we’re saying here is quote the opposite. I would argue that the person who doesn’t see, preach, and bring others experientially into GOD’S ETERNAL PURPOSE isn’t missional in the biblical sense. To my mind, one of the greatest missional pioneers was T. Austin-Sparks. As far as I can tell, he was the first to see the Mission of God the most clearly. How many modern missional folks have read his work? Or care to?
For an introduction to the eternal purpose, see purpose, see: http://ptmin.podbean.com/e/the-eternal-purpose/
Frank, I’ve read this post several times, including the comments, and your books on “Pagan Christianity” and “Reimagining Church”, and I’m currently reading your book on “Jesus Manifesto”. I think that is clear from all of these writings that you are seeking to correct some historic and serious abuses and misunderstandings about what is involved in any human efforts to “serve” God. I, and many of your associates and friends, support you in your effort. Your insights into this historic process are very helpful.
I think that most thoughtful Christians can recognize that the “ekklesia” is not a building. And some understand that it is not an organization. And others are with you, as am I, in recognizing that “ekklesia” is the dynamic living body of Jesus Christ that can be seen in the “corporate” form of its “members”. I think that it would help me, and perhaps others as well, if you could clarify the role or roles of individuals in the “ekklesia” in regard to the particular “services” that they are legitimately called to provide in this “body”. It is obvious that you have a special and distinct service to provide as the author of many of these helpful insights (the books you write are not the minutes of group meetings of the “ekklesia”), and it would help others of us as well to understand our personal “callings” if you could clarify this matter for us, or at least for me. And this matter is not just regarding our individual roles in “evangelism”, but the other ministries of service in “ekklesia” as well. Thank you for your special “services”.
Bob: For the sake of others here, you are actively engaged in bringing the gospel to all nations. But you are one of the few folks in this work that understands and proclaims God’s eternal purpose. I appreciate you very much in this regard, and am glad you have made the comment. Another person on this list is probably one of the most gifted evangelists I’ve ever met. He very naturally brings people to Christ. His comment resonated with every word in my post and talked about the perils of being guilted to share the gospel with others. It’s amazing to me that some people think that if you talk about sharing Christ by the Spirit instead of by guilt, duty, or obligation, that you are against evangelism. It’s truly incredible.
If I understand your question correctly, “service in the body” is fleshed out rather naturally (you can insert the word organic here). I think Paul’s lists in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12 do a good job describing those various services. I’ve developed this elsewhere, but from my observations over the years, the evangelists in the body have a very natural way of sharing Christ with unbelievers and they’re very effective at it. It’s as natural to them as breathing. Shepherds are those who care for the saints personal needs, and they are often quite wise in navigating them through problems. Prophets are those who serve with bringing the Lord’s mind to bear on matters when it’s been lost sight of. Some folks are naturally gifted at organizing events, some are gifted at creating beautiful songs that capture the experience of the body and God’s heart, some are gifted to expound the Scriptures in a way that reveal Christ in beautiful and powerful ways, etc. etc. In body life, people are free to function as God made them. And there is freedom that not all are prophets, shepherd, teachers, evangelists, etc. But the body functions in a very natural way. There are of course other ministries and gifts, some of which benefit the lost also.
On the contrary the push for Church evangelism can actually send people to hell. The root basis for this error came into though the Humanism movement of the 1960’s it is the foundation for the Laodician present day church. (The sermon – “ten shekels and a shirt by Paris Reidhead should be required listening for every Christian in the present church age) The idea that God exists for the benefit of man is the root of humanist thought. In other words, everyone MUST get saved!!!! Because saving humanity is the key. I would think that the best example of God’s feeling towards people who reject him would be when he saved Noah and his family and drowned the rest of humanity.
I have a guy that I work with that got “saved” in a church service when he was 16. Since then he hasn’t read the Bible, rarely prays, drinks, and goes to strip clubs. He informed me that God loves everyone and realizes that people sin all the time. Jesus said, “a good tree bears good fruit and a corrupt tree bears corrupt fruit.” Some preacher convinced this guy he was born again because he repeated a prayer. The guy I work with will probably wind up in Hell. This is what scares me about the push for evangelism in organized churches.
Frank,
I love you and love the thought instigating that you have brought to the body of Christ. You, however are not the most logical person in the world. I am asking if anyone, including you can disassemble my propositions (above) and show me where my conclusions are invalid?
1. Your immediate proposition “It’s a word given to apostolic workers,” Is an opinion. Even if I acknowledge this, which I have, the thrust of the command still remains multi-generational. If the original Apostles or Apostolic workers are to make disciples and teach them to observe all that Jesus had commanded, then the command to make disciples is included in those commands, then the burden of proof lies on those who made make the proposition that either:
A: the command to make disciples is the only command of Christ which is not included in the “teach them to observe all that I have commanded,” or
B: that the command to make disciples is only for the first generation (the apostolic workers) and then the great commission is fulfilled.
2. Whether or not I have read or not read any book is irrelevant to the logical validity of my propositions. I could just as easily have asked if you have read Clement of Alexandria’s “Paedagogus” in its original greek? By asking this question, I, or you, make a hidden proposition that because I haven’t read such and such, that I can’t have a fully valid point of view.
3. Bringing up 2 Tim 2:2 while being an example of how some may misinterpret scripture, is not relevant to my proposition either. I will be happy to address that passage separately and in another time with any who care to discuss it. But it is a straw man argument to my original proposition. Brining up 2 Tim 2:2 does not negate nor confirm the validity of my original proposition.
4. Jesus did not give the commission to the 12. There were only eleven. Judas was gone. I however believe that there were others there, but will discuss that at a later point as it too is irrelevant to my original proposition.
5. Just because you see no evidence of this (the commission is given to every brother and sister in Christ) in the gospels and there’s not a hint of it in the epistles,” does not mean it that is not true. This is a classic argument from silence and therefore invalid and also irrelevant to my original proposition.
As for the rest of your response, I agree. We all have a tendency to foist our convictions on others through various extremely human manipulative means.
I remain, your brother in the Lord and still wait for someone to show me that my propositions are invalid.
Miguel
Miguel: thanks for the love :-). Let me first say that we don’t have a “logical” God. Aristotelian logic gets blown to bits in the light of a revelation of Jesus Christ. The Old Testament isn’t very logical either. The attempt to try to make all Scripture fit together using Greek logic will always cause us to miss the deep things of God and to misinterpret the Scriptures. 1 Corinthians 1 and 2 make this plain. Spiritual truths are discerned and interpreted by the Spirit. Divine truth is paradoxical.
If we were to apply logic to your original point, as I understand it, it would be a non sequiter. It doesn’t follow that the great commission applies to everyone in every generation unless it’s proven that it’s not. What must be first established it *why* it would apply to every believer. You make a good stab at this in your recent comment.
While I don’t use logic in my interpretation of Scripture, the Divine patterns emerge and are very consistent because I come to the text with a larger narrative, a narrative that’s derived from a chronological reading of the Bible in its historic context. But also from a Christocentric hermeneutic. This puts so much into perspective and challenges so many assumptions we’ve made along the way.
Very quickly, Jesus words to the Twelve was a commission (by the way, the “Twelve” is shorthand in the NT to refer to the men Jesus called, trained, and sent. Matthias later replaced Judas in this).
Jesus was not giving them a list of commands; He was sending them out. In that commission He gave the word about sharing His teachings and commandments, which they did. If you read 1 John, the apostle John did just that. (He speaks of the new commandment.) But there’s no hint of the apostles’ unique commission in his letter or in any other apostolic letter. That cannot be overlooked.
The sending of the Twelve was no more a commission for everyone than was the Spirit’s commission to Paul and Barnabas. In Antioch, the Spirit commissioned/sent Paul and Barnabas to the work. That commission wasn’t given to all the believers in Antioch. If the great commission was given to all, why weren’t the 120 being sent? And why was Paul and Barnabas sent and not the other 3 prophets and teachers who were praying and fasting that day?
Remember, the church is the witness. The apostles were *sent* to preach the gospel and establish communities of the kingdom (=plant churches). The church is the infinite and ultimate witness to Christ. When she’s operating the way she was designed to, that is. There’s no greater evangelist or disciple-maker.
Again: I hope you will take the time to read FINDING ORGANIC CHURCH as it puts all of this in its historical, chronological perspective. The entire book is about apostolic missional ministry based on the consistent principles that can be traced to the Godhead. I don’t think it’s irrelevant to read that book because you were inviting me to react to certain ideas, giving my opinion. That cannot be done in a blog comment in any detailed way. 2 Tim. 2 was an example of a point in relation to your comment. I’m glad you find agreement with the rest of what I said.
I come back to one of my original points: you don’t have to tell a woman to tell others about the man she’s in love with. she does it by instinct, not by guilt, duty, or obligation. No matter how you view the so-called great commission, I hope that you are drowning the people you minister to with a revelation of Jesus Christ so much so that they fall in love with Him, are freed of guilt and condemnation, and are giving their whole lives to Him and to life in His body . . . and you are teaching them how to practically live by His indwelling life, and understand, can articulate, and are fulfilling His eternal purpose. If so, then you and I are tracking, regardless of the way we may interpret certain portions of Scripture. Everything else is postscript as far as I’m concerned.
Ed: thanks for the comment. I think 2 Tim. 2:2 is a classic example of Christians coming to the NT and reading it out of chronological order, not understanding the narrative, but applying the text out of context. Paul was talking to Timothy who was an apostolic worker that he trained in Ephesus along with 7 other men. Jesus trained 12 men to be workers in Galilee and sent them out later. Paul trained 8 in Ephesus and sent them out later. Paul is encouraging Timothy to do the same. The bulk of what Paul tells Timothy and Titus is NOT meant for all Christians, as he was writing to two apostles who were carrying on the work. It’s very hard for believers to see these things without understanding the story. Your quote about the great commission doesn’t come from the NT. The rest of your quotes are all about walking with the Lord. I don’t see any of those being commands to go out and get others saved. However, if you read my points carefully, Christians DO share their Lord with others, but it’s an organic thing, not a religious duty. When it’s the latter, very little comes of it. If you are interested in seeing a narrative approach to the NT, which for me has made the NT come to life and has given me a totally new view of so many things, see my book, “The Untold Story of the New Testament Church.” http://www.ptmin.org/untold
The Great commission, even if given only to the eleven is necessarily and logicaly perpetual.
One can not escape the logical and continual thrust of the passage itself. While given in in context to the eleven, its intention is necessarily broader in scope than 22 original ears which heard it. It is universal in the sense that every disciple is to become a disciple maker. The disciples are commissioned to teach the new disciples to keep what Jesus commanded which includes the command to make disciples.
If anyone can show me how to logically break the perpetual thrust of the Great Commission, I would like to see it.
Miguel: It’s a word given to apostolic workers then and now. Have you read “Finding Organic Church” yet? It shows how that commission was fleshed out by the early church by looking at the NT in its chronological sequence. We have constructed theologies and practices and interpretations of Scripture by taking verses out of their historical and spiritual context. One can prove anything that way. 2 Tim. 2:2 is a classic example of this. See my comment on that text in the comments section. I think the burden of proof is on the person who says the commission that Jesus gave to the 12 — who He called, trained, and sent to be APOSTLES is given to every single brother and sister in Christ. I see no evidence of this in the gospels and there’s not a hint of it in the epistles. That point must not be overlooked.
Jesus said to the Twelve that they would be going into all the world. (As previously established, that’s what the word “go” means there in the Greek. Jesus predicated that they would be going.)
The Twelve certainly took the gospel throughout the Roman Empire, mostly in Palestine, and raised up churches. Some went beyond Palestine. So did the other apostles who followed them (Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, etc.)
Now . . . if we’re going to put the Great Commission on the shoulders of every Christian, then that necessary means that:
1) most of the believers in the first-century were disobedient and in sin. Why? because most of them never traveled beyond their own home town. That’s a first-century fact. And there’s no hint that Paul, Peter or James were trying to get the believers to travel all over the world. There’s not a trace of that in their letters. No do they ever mention the commission nor command the saints to evangelize.
2) most Christians today are in sin as they aren’t traveling the whole world preaching the gospel. I remember a very famous Christian musician who before his passing put the Great Commission on every Christian. He said, “you should only stay in this country if God tells you to say. If He hasn’t said stay, then you must go.”
In response, thousands of young people signed up out of duty and guilt to become missionaries and/or to go on missionary trips. And many of them burned out; some aren’t even following the Lord today. They went not out of life, but out of guilt and duty.
Consider these two points in the equation as you affirm that the commission to the Twelve which is repeated to Paul and Barnabas is a call to every believer.
Paul said, “Are all apostles – sent ones?” in 1 Corinthians 12. His answer is “no.”
Note: It is the tendency for the evangelist to want to make all evangelists. The teacher to make all teachers. The missionary to make all missionaries. The prophet to make all prophets.
How about drowning God’s people in a revelation of their Lord and showing them how to know Him together and be a witness to the world corporately? I’ll take that over trying to get people to obey a commission given to apostles out of duty any day of the week. That’s what the early apostles did. But how many modern missionaries and pastors do this . . . or are able to do it?
I think at bottom that the root of all of this is that many preachers FEAR that if they don’t preach duty, obligation, guilt,”you must go out and preach the gospel else the blood is on you”, that God’s people won’t.
What wonders come with giving people a revelation of Christ and then showing them HOW to live by Him . . .
To Joanne;
If some individuals do not obey the Spirit’s promptings and instead quench Him, that hardly negates the fact that walking in the Spirit is the only proper way to evangelize, nor does it prove that one must add duty and obligation to help with it. If they are quenching the Spirit, they are not yet as enamored of and full of Christ as they need to be, and shouldn’t be inflicting their flesh on unsuspecting strangers. We can only share what we are. When they are full of the Spirit, it will flow out automatically. There is a commandment to ‘Love the Lord with all your heart,” but that doesn’t mean I can drum that up out of duty because someone taught me that commandment. I still have to meet the Lord and come to love Him, or it’s a farce. I really don’t see how any good fruit can come of sharing the Gospel out of duty and guilt. Wouldn’t the average person smell the insincerity of it? I know all my attempts at street witnessing were total flops. My brother who did it because he wanted to, and because he really IS an evangelist, had great results. But now that I am learning to live by the Lord’s life a little, people now approach me, and I actually have something ‘natural’ to say to them.
The example of a person in love not telling those who would disapprove: well, there is a Scripture about not casting one’s pearls before swine, and plenty of examples of Jesus and Paul refusing to talk to sinners who were in a unreceptive frame of mind –Herod is a good example. Jesus did answer some of Pilate’s questions piercingly, but he totally ignored Herod. Only the Spirit can help us differentiate between those who only ‘appear’ to resist and disapprove, and those who are being ‘swine’ for the time being. ANd it’s ok for us to make mistakes along the way. We have to ‘learn’ to walk in Him. That means we will miss some opportunities, and screw some others up, but our Father will still delight in our baby steps.
I would like to ‘address’ the NT Wright (scholarly) remark:
“contemporary Christians come to the New Testament and read it through the lens of the Reformers with respect to justification and the works of the Law. I submit that contemporary Christians come to the New Testament and read it through the lens of D.L.”
I submit that to individuals mandating a witness of guilt and manipulation, whether professionals or laity, the bible is either seldom to never read, although ‘referred to,’ or else handled as a ‘proof text’ for a lifeless form of Christianity. This modern day ‘bibliolotry’ turns the bible into a weapon of darkness, extinguishing the reality that the sacred text is ‘God-breathed.’ Where Wright uses ‘contemporary’ there needs to be an ‘Evangelical’ modifier. The contemporary Evangelical (which is a quite removed from the historical origin, for a very readable exposure see Richard Lovelace’s Dynamics of Spiritual Life) is told what they must believe ‘about’ the bible as opposed to reading it to breath in the Life of approximately 2000 years of witness.
The added contemporary Evangelical lens of ‘how to view the bible’ (rationalist bias) exacerbates, inverts and blurs the vision of purposes, intentions and actions in living-the-Life. What one ‘expects’ from the bible in every way shapes what one ‘gets’ from the bible.
Modern day Evangelicals and evangelists typically have their fellowships with but one oar in the water, far out at sea. That oar being a man-centered theology, anthro-theology, a poor substitute for the Infinitely Gracious One who is enveloped in mystery. This puts Evangelism, as you have quite accurately portrayed, on the heads of believers, and displaces it from the generous hand of Our Creator.
Ron: Let me add that the theology of D.L. Moody when it comes to evangelism is indeed very human centered. Being saved from hell is a human-centered issued. Not that it’s wrong, but it benefits humanity. It’s correct, but not complete. God’s eternal purpose is God-centered. The Lord is the one who benefits. I’m happy that so many have been introduced to and impacted by the eternal purpose lately. It’s why I wrote “From Eternity to Here” which is an entire discussion on the eternal purpose. It puts evangelism in it’s proper place and reframes it in a larger context.
Frank, your courage to write and discuss this matter publicly and globally is very inspiring. Shake it continuously until the real, true truth will separate from the pseudo, look alike truth that was passed to us traditionally by our theologians.
A simple observation, Today, they just used the word evangelism or mission to force and produce a false guilt to their members. So that they will bring more “recruits” and bring more funds to support their human efforts of programs and activities. , This is what they have learned from telemarketing guru. Sadly, they were building their own kingdom and Re-building the Tower of Babel.
This is must be emphasized and deserved to be a REMINDER for us all as the Bride.
“A believer’s life that is lived by Christ embodies the gospel. Paul and Peter make this clear throughout their letters. A life lived for Christ will often provoke open-hearted questions from others. It will be reflected in acts of mercy, love, care, giving, and kindness. Equally so, someone who shows the love of Christ to their coworkers (for instance) will often be sought out when a coworker is going through a trial. Their heart will be opened to hear about the living Christ, and what makes you so different. Such cases are often the best opportunities to share the Lord with others.”
Thank you Frank, hope you can visit and speak here in the Philippines
Doy: thanks for the kind words and encouragement. What’s said is that people like me who are led of the Spirit to take the tree once in awhile tend to get ostracized by what’s happening in mainstream Christianity. It’s really sad, but it’s always been the case historically. The mainstream needs the voices of those who will challenge some of the clutter and bring us back to Jesus Christ. I love John Stott’s quote about challenging evangelicalism in light of Scripture.
I get so many letters from frustrated pastors telling me, “it’s not working, I’ve given my life to making my people better disciples and it’s just not working.” These are tall men, honest men, men of integrity and humility to make such an admission. This is one of the main reasons why 1700 pastors leave the clergy every MONTH in the U.S. Some of them have admitted that the system doesn’t work. That we have got to be doing something wrong. And many have the integrity to stop blaming God’s people, but instead, to look at what they’ve been preaching. So many of them are now open more than ever. We can continue to guilt God’s people into making disciples and sharing the gospel, but it’s not going to work any better than it has in the past.
We need a new view of evangelism. What I’ve written in this post isn’t theory. I’ve learned most of it by observation and experience. And to my mind, it’s confirmed by the NT witness.
Thanks Frank. Many don’t understand why I understand this.
A couple of nights ago, 2 “regulars” came into the coffee shop about an hour before closing. It has been reported to me by more than one that they are friends beyond casual friendship.
The conversation quickly turned to “God-talk” – by them. It gladdened my heart to hear one of them proclaim the supremacy of Christ and his grace- especially from what he accomplished on the cross. In the conversation, the person courageously stated to me: “I am a weak man. I don’t know what I would do without grace. I’m a very weak man.”
After they left, a traditional couple came in. Both are Christ Followers who attend a very orthodox type of church. With my heart still alight from the previous conversation, I shared with them the richness of our dialogue. I told them about the struggle they shared and the mutual dependency we all affirmed of our need for Christ’s mercy. After I specified a certain area of struggle, the female asked: “Well, what is their salvation status?” It was like a knitting in a balloon.
I offered my answer with proper candor: “I don’t know that.”
My mind quickly envisioned: “Two men went up to the Temple to pray…” and I wanted to repeat the challenging question Jesus asked. But I determined that it would not be understood. Sad. 🙁
This is a great post. I have only one comment. When you say that the “Church is the new Israel” I am concerned that readers may think that you are spruking “replacement theology”. I have read enough of your books (all of them actually) to know that this is not your “thing” and I understand what you really mean. I hope others do too.
Paul’s statements are germane in 1Cor 3: I have planted, Apollos watered: but God gave the increase. So neither is he that planted anything, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase.
As we begin to understand these truths, we are liberated from the ‘duty’ of having to ‘be harvesters’ in God’s vineyard all the time. When He wants us to be planters, we are available, and so are we when He requires us to be ‘gardeners’. We surely don’t evangelize because we are expecting a reward for being ‘harvesters’ on so and so occasions but because we love Him and share His life and passion. Thank you Jesus.
God bless you, Frank and all those who have commented on this post. HEAVENRULES!
I most liked your emphasis on the whole race as opposed to emphasis on the person who just got you to the starting line. I don’t know if I can even really consider that the business of “making disciples” would be limited to those who consider themselves apostles as your yourself as I understand it consider yourself to be; so wrapped up am I in trying to make myself and others disciples. I feel it’s my role to encourage people to be more Christ like or disciples. In this way I am helping God. I’m thinking there’s a vertical and horizontal measure of making disciples.
I had listened recently to Zig Zigler explain his religeon. He’s an Evangelical known more for his salesmanship books who has it if I understood him correctly that making the initial commitment was the greatest thing to him putting no emphasis at all on not sinning or commandment keeping which it seems to me Evangelicals place no emphasis on. I hear people with a Evangelical background say things like Jesus kept the commandments so we don’t have to. Am I correct in this? Jesus said to religionists of his day, You make the word of God of no effect with your traditions. It seems to day religionists are of the same mind. Religionists are most happy building large institutions. Jesus said I have not come to do away with the commandments and yet we do just that instead often making up our own commandments. I think Evangelicals of the past, perhaps in Moody’s day made up sins out of drinking, dancing and card playing activities not considered sins in the Bible. Yet throughout the New Testament and three times in Revelation we have references to Christians being commandment keepers. Modern Evangelicals are instead generally good people. using peer support and their conscience to determine what is good. In this regard they are similar to modern Jews. Modern Jews are not commandment keepers either except the 6% who are Orthodox. They too are generally good. When Christ returns He will find religions that are generally good.
Rod: Thanks for posting. Just for clarity, I never said nor do I believe that *only* apostles make disciples (converts). In fact, believers do share the Lord with lost people and often bring them to the starting line (or somewhere before it). This is stated in the points. Regarding commandment-keeping, we need to be very careful here. Only the life of God can keep the Divine standard. Jesus did it by living by His Father’s indwelling life. And the Christian can only do so by living by Christ’s indwelling life. We cannot do this ourselves and Jesus said so.
Thanks Frank I appreciate that encouraging insight. For me I have found I used to feel like I had to save everyone and if I didn’t God would be upset with me. As I have lived in body life now four months I have realized who Jesus really is because the head and the body cannot be separated. Now I don’t think about sharing him at all because he’s my focal point not the other way around. Like Paul talks about in Romans 1:16 he talks about not being ashamed of the gospel. Now when I share the Lord it’s really him, not me feeling I have to save everyone, not me focusing on myself and how I can use the write words or rhetoric if you will, but Christ and when it’s him there isn’t shame. Thanks for pointing us all to Christ and nothing else.
Nathan: What you are saying is a PERFECT example of what I’m talking about. It’s difficult for some people to grasp, however. Hopefully they will read your testimony and D’s and get a better handle on this.
When what our Lord said in St. John 17:20-24 is the cause, what the early church experienced in Acts 2:42-47 becomes the effect-without even trying.
what a great read that presents every basic part of this rethinking of evangelism and so freeing! After participating with others in an organic way (still learning by the way, lol) I have come to realize that your function is not meant to be everyone’s function. It is amazing how we can say it but don’t practice it. Now, I’ve read 1 Cor 12-14 many times and know that everyone has a different function, but when you are in face to face community how often have I suggested that others should be doing what I am doing? I think too often. Definitely brings to mind learning with patience to bear with one another in love. The cross of Christ is so important! Praise God I don’t have the same inclination to see that others should be doing what I am doing! So it goes with evangelism, like all the other functions. Thanks Frank for the great read!
John: Right on. In fact, those who are called to be evangelists in the body are typically the ones who push that calling on everyone else. Moody was an evangelist, for instance.
thank you Frank
a necessary post, but this “Moody” paradigm is so deeply rooted in the evangelical culture and practice…
it is part of this church identity.
… it is like saying to someone with curled hair: “your problem is that you have curled hair”…
that’s why I think there is often very emotional reactions about this issue.
Tommy: Tru dat. That’s why I wrote this post. If we want to see this mindset break in any significant way, pass the link on to others.
Good grief Frank, I can’t separate anything in the article from the rest, as dodgy, I love it all! Thanks for stating these truths so well.
Someone said about people being content to sit around, but how many are forced to languish in undeserved guilt at home, because of unwarranted criticism from the misguided mob?
Joanne, Re:
‘And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent?’
Read the next verse or two, which states emphatically ‘but they have heard’. The heavens declare (preach??) the glory of God. I don’t know about you but not many of us can top the glory of creation as a sermon to all.
Pardon my lack of clarity. What I find thought provoking is how you compared the call to explore the fact that God has an eternal purpose with what NT Wright argued with respect to justification. In both arguments the focus is removed from the individual and placed on the corporate body. Is that what you intended to convey by mentioning justification according to Wright?
That helps, Bobby. Thanks for the observation. I wasn’t really making that specific application, though it does fit quite well. I was talking more broadly in that Wright points out that we look at the NT through a specific lens passed down to us from someone in the past. And I’m pointing to the same idea, though I’m pointing to a different lens from a different person in the past. But the phenomenon is still the same.
Frank,
Great post. An additional thought related to the greatest evangelist being the ekklesia of God; Jesus gave us the two greatest commandments as love God and love others (condensed). I believe and have taught that when we live this out, people will want to know our Jesus because of the impact that the ekklesia will make in the community and world at large. People are attracted to a love story, especially if it involves themselves! I fear that the world has not seen much love coming from the “church” today.
Sounds very much like the conclusion I came to and what I wrote 8 or so years ago.
This is really good, Frank. I’ve been sharing this perspective with many others as well.
Frank
” But if you preach the glories of the Lord Jesus Christ to where God’s people are intoxicated with Him, you’ll have a group of fire-brands that will naturally share their Lord as opportunities arise.”
I have experince this first hand with a well known preacher in South Africa. This guy preach revelation upon revelation, killing holy cows left and right, preaching the glories of God. By listenig to him, I began to live the truth and it liberated me to tell people the good news of Jesus and what He has done. Not guilt driven, but because I have found life and wanted to share it with anyone who would listen.
I’d agree that you’re really zeroing in on something when you talk about evangelism not being a “duty”… I spent two years on a “missions ship”, where there was intense pressure to do things like street-evangelism and tract distribution and such. Something about it just felt so gimmicky, so off, when trying and squeeze the awesome wonder of Christ and his gospel into some thirty second story-board presentation or something. The more averse to street evangelism I became, the more guilty I was made to feel. It had to be something wrong with me…
But now, years later, I am freed from such guilt, not because I don’t care about the lost, but because God has patiently revealed to me that saving the lost is not my responsibility to carry. Like in the parable, bringing someone to the “race track” isn’t “saving” someone anyhow, it’s only the moment where they start running… But it is the spirit who does the real work, who softens hearts and makes people able to hear the Truth. It really is about seasons, because when a person’s heart is in the right place (and usually only God knows when that is…) then a single, sincere off-hand comment can penetrate deeper, and do more “evangelism”, than could any sort of intentional, scripted attempt at converting someone…
Whether on our street, or in a place like Equador, all we really do is scatter seeds as we walk along, He is the one who makes them grow…
D: Thank you for sharing this. You’ve spoken for thousands upon thousands of Christians with your words. I’ve met so many who have the same story as yours. So glad to hear your testimony. Your ability to articulate it so clearly is impressive as well.
Great response to Dan Kimball, Frank. I couldn’t agree more. I like the way you think about and use the scriptures.
Okay, will try to make my point more clearly.
1) In response to your second bullet, “There is nowhere in the NT epistles to the churches where one word is said to them about the need to evangelize,” my reading of Romans 10:14-15 says otherwise.
Harkening back to what I said above, I believe that Paul was telling the believers in Rome, and others who would hear/read his letter, that in order for people to respond to the gospel they must hear the gospel, and for them to hear it there most be a willingness to speak it.
He acknowledged the discouragement that comes from speaking the gospel to people who refuse to listen. He pointed to Isaiah’s career, and made reference to his own, but in both cases, Paul and Isaiah, the speaker remains faithful to speak, knowing there will be a remnant who do listen (taking all of Romans 9-11 together) and Isaiah 6.
In the broadest sense, all who listen to Paul’s words are going to know people who have not had the gospel shared with them. Who will share it? Who will give those people a chance to respond in faith? Those who have the gospel.
2) In response to your sixth bullet, “Christians who love the Lord Jesus Christ cannot but share their Lord with others, when the season is right and when a door has opened by the Spirit,” I understand, I think, where you’re going with this. This is love motivation, and sensitivity to the Spirit’s leading, rather than guilt motivated, a task to check off of one’s obligation list of religious duities.
But my point is that people are complicated. An in-love teen, for example, may not share being in love with her parents, though they would be very important people to tell, because she senses they may not like the news. And being sensitive to the Holy Spirit’s guidance is not a guarantee to the person who has been refusing to listen to Him (hence the scriptural phrase “quench the Spirit”)
Therefore, to know that since one has the gospel, it is right and good to share it with others so that they can at least have a chance to respond, helps in those situations where — like with Paul — past experiences could make one hesitate, or — like with Jeremiah or Timothy — personality would dictate otherwise
I agree with general tenor of what you have to say, and am thankful for God’s choosing of you to speak and write as you do. By the same token, I feel as though your “pendulum” has swung too far away from every believer’s call to share the gospel.
There really are some things all believers are called to do, scattered as they are around the gospels and epistles (sharing hopsitality, for example, even to strangers). Sharing the gospel is one of them.
thanks Joanne. I appreciate your reply and kind words. My only comment to is that if Romans 10 is read in context, I don’t see this interpretation working. Paul is simply speaking of the fact that faith receives Jesus Christ, and faith comes by hearing the gospel. And the gospel is preached by those who are “sent.” There’s no explicit command or implication for the Roman Christians to share their faith with others. That they were doing that organically I don’t deny. But he’s not telling them to. His subject in that chapter is the content of the gospel and the salvation experience, it seems to me.
I’ve never seen the guilt/duty thing working in real life when it comes to sharing Christ. Instead, getting more of Jesus tends to produce an aroma of Christ, a love for others, and a sensitivity to the Lord that nothing else can replace. The testimony from the young man that I quoted in my comment to Rick is just one real life example of this. To my mind, the NT challenge is pursue the Lord, know Him, and follow Him by living by His life (with others) and out of that flows everything else. This all gets back to living by His indwelling life, which I feel is the missing ingredient in much of evangelicalism today.
Mark: Bingo.
Hello Frank!!
And a belated happy birthday!!!
As always, I LOVE what you write and think….. I agree with a bunch that you wrote here, but I must say I don’t quite agree with all of it based on what I read in Scripture and the examples of the disciples.
I fully agree with cheapened forms of evangelism. Hit and run, non-relational, reductionist forms of gospel presentation, guilt driven etc. mthods and philosophies which you mentioned. Totally, totally agree there!
I also agree that not everyone has the gift of evangelism. So to put pressure on people to function in gifts they may not have, isn’t right either. Like any mission trip oversees or to go build homes for the poor in Mexico, not everyone has the gift of evangelism as some use skills to build, or plan the trips or serve children etc. But the trip itself is a missional trip and all types of people with different gifts serve as “missionaries”.
However, what I see in the Bible is in Acts 2, as soon as the Holy Spirit came and the church was birthed, they didn’t go run into homes to be together. They began immediately proclaiming outloud to strangers the good news of the gospel and who Jesus was. They didn’t wait 3 years, they started immediately. You trace the whole story of through the book of Acts and you see the disciples not passively sitting home or hoping neighbors come to faith by their love. They travelled, the went into places to speak, the met with people intentionally to share about Jesus, the crucifixion and resurrection. Jesus himself when calling his disciples said “I will make you fishers of people” as the very first thing he said (that was recorded) to his disciples that they were called into mission. The very last words before His ascension were telling them to go and make disciples, which meant new disciples, not the already converted. And as a result, they travelled, they took action, they were not stay at home Christians hoping people would get saved.
I was at a NT Wright event recently and he said something to the sort, that today we often reject the very forms of evangelism that brought us to faith because we now see them as simplistic. Which they might have been true. But he then said maybe these simple forms are what God uses, as he knew people who stay in the faith for their lifetimes as a result. And it is almost becomming an excuse not to evangelize or to have reasons for not seeing new disciples, blaming for simplistic forms – and ironically, the very ones which God used often to bring us to a decision point for Jesus. It is fascinating to hear that such a large majority of us came to faith in Jesus through an altar call (like I believe you told me you did) or someone sharing with us directly about faith who did “evangelize” us. But now we say that isn’t right, but at the same time being in a local church we just baptized 15 people last week and listening to their stories they were “evangelized” as in proclaiming the good news from someone. Either a family member, or someone who was a friend or someone at the church took the time to explain and go out of their way with them. And I am so happy someone did with me. But all these stories has someone taking the effort and time to do so. It didn’t happen via osmosis withouth words, explanation also taking place intentionally.
I fully understand ‘evangelism” does not equal “disciple” – and we can see people place faith in Jesus and not grow or understand what they did. So we have to have a holistic sense of what it means to follow Jesus, not just raise your hand or say a prayer.
But I don’t see the New Testament teach anything BUT being extremely passionate about evangelism. I think how we define evangelism is important, and maybe that is what you are stressing. But one read through the book of Acts shows how the instant the church was birthed they immediately began on the mission of seeing new disciples made.
Hope this makes sense! I love you Frank and hope we get to hang out again soon!!!
Dan
Dan: Great seeing you come onto the blog to discuss. I tip my hat to you, bro. You’re a model for everyone else who is involved in these matters in a leadership capacity. We need to discuss these things. May your tribe increase!
A few questions based on your comments:
1. You say that the believers in Jerusalem proclaimed the gospel to strangers immediately. Can you show me where you’re reading this? I see the apostles sharing the gospel, building the church and equipping the saints in the temple courts the first four years of the birth of the church. I also see the first thing the believers did was meet, and meet often (the Greek stresses that). Breaking bread, continuing in the apostles teaching (which was Christ) and fellowship and prayers. What am I missing? I’ve got my book of Acts in front of me. I don’t see the believers sharing the gospel until they were dispersed, and it was an organic spontaneous thing as I’ve described. Those folks were intoxicated with Jesus Christ.
2. The “fishers of men” word was given by Jesus to His apostles, specifically Peter and Andrew … those that He trained and later sent out. Where does Jesus or Paul or Peter give this word to all believers?
3. In the world I live in and grew up in, I don’t see people not caring about evangelism. I instead see the exact opposite. I’m speaking of charismatic and evangelical circles. For the most part, they’ve been guilted to do it and aren’t seeing much results or fruit (see my opening story — I’ve watched/heard that dozens of times in various places). I’ve met some folks in mainline denominations and some Reformed that are reluctant to share Christ with others. But again, for such people, I don’t think the antidote is to put them under the pile or drive them with religious duty, but to give them a revelation of Christ that bowls them over and electrifies them with His life. See my comment to Rick where I give a testimony from a young man who was part of a well-known parachurch organization that focuses all attention on evangelism. To my mind it says volumes about this whole subject.
4. I’m not sure that we can separate a convert (who has been evangelized) from a disciple. It seems to me that in the NT, they are the same. Note that when Luke describes how Paul and Barnabas planted the church in Derbe, he says they preached the gospel to the city and “made many disciples” (Acts 14:20-21, NASB & NKJV). The convert vs. disciple dichotomy came in with Darby, I believe. So it seems to me anyway.
I hope the race track metaphor provoked some thought in putting things in a different perspective. Thanks!
Frank,
Challenging as always.
I know what you’re addressing here is primarily scriptural as it should be. What struck me in reading it however was considering what the impact of changes of communication and technology have had upon how we’re understanding this. I suspect it may have had something to do with the environment that Moody’s and Billy Sunday’s push on evangelism arose in.
In the times of the early church and apostles, society was less transient, communities more agrarian and evangelism as it was practiced was more an issue of prolonged exposure through more stable social settings.
Much of what undergirds evangelism today is deeply impacted by increased means of communication through an ever changing and accelerating change in technology both in terms of transportation and communication itself. I think I’ve seen from you in other contexts, that we live in an age every bit as radical in its changes and implications as the introduction of the printing press was to the reformation (forgive me if I remember wrong, but I’d be surprised if you haven’t said something similar to that, and if you haven’t …. well you should! 😉 )
We’re in a culture where we’ve increased communication and lowered intimacy in many ways. I think that’s a dynamic that has impacted our view of evangelism and driven many to focus upon efficiency and scale as opposed to actually building relationships and bridges in other manners. Combine that with the theological skewing and perhaps we have an explanation (at least in part) as to why we’re more willing to accept what passes for popular evangelism in the past 100 years and even today. Much of the focus on evangelism is adapting in methodology and in that environment it’s even a little easier to cease to examine carefully the roots of why we do what we do, assuming that we just need to adapt to the change in environment.
Hope that makes sense anyway. I’d be interested in your reaction to that.
blessings,
bart
Bart: Great point. I don’t see what you’re saying in contradiction to any of the points made. Specifically, the point about sharing the Lord through many different “means” not just verbally fits into this. As well as one’s life being a witness. That’s an aspect that comes through in technology for sure. Appreciate you.
Sharing the one who loves me most has and always will be most effective shared face to face. This has been the means used by the early church. Modern media has not and will never replace that personal touch when the Holy Spirit moves us to share His divine mercy with those that are still veiled.
Having said that I must state that I am happy to have access to modern media to readily be able to communicate with brethren from all over.
Grace and Peace
It’s a disputable matter, actually. Who are the ones “sent” in Romans 10:14-15? Is it just Paul himself? Tall order for one man to reach an entire race.
What is the average Joe Christian’s life to look like? For certain, the believers in Rome included every variety of person. The letter Paul wrote to them was for every ear. Surely all of them knew people who had never heard the gospel. Is it possible some of those hearts were not pricked by Paul’s questions, “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent?”
But not all have obeyed the gospel, Paul went on to write.
I know, I know. He was explaining why fellow Jews who had heard Paul preach were not converted. Paul was resonating with Isaiah’s long and heavy-hearted career of preaching to a deaf people for sixty years (God’s call).
Nevertheless, he put a truism out there: faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.
Yes, many had heard the gospel so far, Jews in this case, and rejected it. But many others hadn’t heard the gospel. For those listening to this letter, it is hard to imagine they did not put two and two together that the people in their individual circles who had not yet heard the gospel were providentially connected to them who had the gospel.
By the way, I have often heard this analogy, that a person in love (romance, grandma with new baby pictures, and so on) will freely share about their love object. Not totally true. In an environment perceived to be hostile to such news, an in-love person will keep their stories to themselves so as not to spoil the experience, or to expose themselves, or their love object, to negativity.
It is possible in innumerable ways to become insensitive to the Holy Spirit’s direction, (including, presumably, when and how and where to share the gospel), as the writer of Hebrews warned believers, in chapter 3.
I do agree with you that
(1) guilting people into doing anything at all (evangelism being just one thing) is wrong all the time everywhere for all people
(2) God’s purpose was revealed at the dawn of creation and has not changed (From Eternity To Here)
(3) Every culture and generation will interpret what they see/read/hear etc. through the lens of their time and culture (although I am not completely postmodern in this stance)
Joanne: I don’t think Paul was saying he was the only person to preach the gospel. So you have me lost in the first part of your post. Perhaps it would be better to pick a specific point in the post and show biblically where and why you disagree. Then again, maybe you agree with all of it. I really couldn’t tell. Thanks.
I’m not sure if I agree or disagree or both. You speak of rethinking evangelistic methods inherited from Moody (I agree) but you compare that to NT Wright and the new perspective (I disagree). You say not everyone is called to be an evangelist (I agree) but you seem to say that the lost can be saved by being near the ekklesia and that ekklesia must first go through a season of internal growth before going out into a season of outward growth (I disagree). Is there any other way to preach the gospel than with words telling forth the news of Christ and Him crucified? It may be foolishness to many but the gospel is the power of God for salvation and the gospel must be heard. I hope I have misunderstood you, but if not, I hope that the scripture near the end of my response is easily recognized.
Bobby: I’m lost. what points in the post do you disagree with *exactly* and more importantly WHY — give us Scripture please, not just opinion.
And who said that preaching Christ and Him crucified isn’t important? Or that the gospel isn’t important? Hu? It appears that you’re reading things into the post and our comments that aren’t present.
Great points. I remember your response when I once asked you about evangelism in organic church. You said to “get drunk on Jesus” and the rest would happen naturally. I remember thinking, “that’s it?” How simple and yet fresh it was to me. It released me from much guilt because I’m not the type who likes to approach someone at random and then convince them of something. I don’t like to be pushy and I don’t like to argue. Many evangelism programs take these routes. (I know from experience on both sides of the coin.)
I’ve noticed that the new pardigm has changed how I talk about Christ to others. I’m not too worried about presenting a doctrine or plan of salvation. I talk more about the beauty of Christ, the joy of knowing Him, His love for us, just as I would tell someone about my wife and children.
I don’t think you’ll get any arguments from me on this. I grew up Baptist, but I’m actually quite fond of the Orthodox concept of theosis to describe the main goal of God’s work in our lives.
Numerous points stood out to me. The that Jesus sent the apostles out after a period of community living and training, the fact that not all are called to be evangelists, and the absence of a command for believers who aren’t apostles to evangelize resonated the most with me. Personally, I really enjoy sharing the Lord with non-believers, but I’ve also carried around loads of guilt when I though I wasn’t doing it enough. As I look back on many awkward, strained attempts to share the Gospel, I think I was misguided. My most effective times of sharing the Lord were when I was moved by compassion and love rather than by duty or compulsion.
Also, many individuals who are making thei r living off of God’s people have a vested interest in getting more bodies in the seats. I’m learning to refrain from judging the motives of others, but I think this conflict of interest can be part of the equation. I think that unbelievers are better at spotting that dynamic than believers sometimes. They know when we’re selling them something rather than introducing them to someone.
Scott: I really appreciate what you say here. You’ve nailed one of the big elephants in the room. God’s people have been put under the pile in this area (refer back to my story at the front of the post). I can’t count the number of Christians who have been set free when they hear some of the above. The result — they share the Lord with others in liberty and under the Spirit’s guidance. And the difference is enormous. To my mind, the race track image helps put things in perspective.
Frank, could you point me anywhere where you have addressed this?
I never have as it’s not my burden. I suggest you go to Len Sweet’s site and find his podcast on hell. It’s very good.
Thanks for the good, thoughtful response to my comments on the article. You were too kind! Now I only disagree with 1.5% of what you write instead of 2%! 🙂
Thanks Guy. And you just may be right on the 1.5% 😉
Of the hundreds of pages I have read of your writings over the years, I would agree with roughly 98%. This post represents the 2% that I would have to disagree with you.
While you make some excellent points above–and several I would agree with–if time permitted in this limited commenting space, I could share the flip side to each of the points giving a different perspective.
For example, you write, “The so-called “Great Commission” was an apostolic commission that Jesus gave to the 12 apostles – the men whom He lived with for 3.5 years, trained, and then sent out to the apostolic work…” True, but was Jesus intent that only the 11 (12), be the ones to go make disciples, baptize, and teach? Surely the evidence from Acts and the Epistles shows more than just the 12 doing what Jesus originally told the twelve who went up to the Mount to say “good-bye” that day!
As you might know, my wife and I have served as “sent ones” to Ecuador for the past 24 years. The past couple of days I have been going through a lot of old slides of the beginnings of the work here in Ecuador. Over and over I have thought of the fact that what would have happened if people like my parents, and other early pioneers HAD NOT OBEYED what Jesus said to do, and just left it up to one of the “chosen twelve” to somehow show up and do the tough plowing of the ground for the Gospel Seed?
Certainly there are many ways to evangelize, and I would even agree with your point that the ekklesia is God’s choice instrument for carrying out His Eternal Purpose, but if we, His Body, are content to just sit around marveling at God’s Eternal Purposes and don’t get off the couch and obey what He said to do, there wouldn’t be 2-million fellow brothers and sisters in this beloved nation of Ecuador!
I know with your writing skills and “smarts” you are already poking holes in my poorly stated attempts, but I am wired from head to toe about seeing His Glory amongst the nations. I won’t rest until He returns, or first taken home!
May God continue to use you to bless, instruct, help, guide, the greater Body, but if you ever come down our way, the above is NOT the message we want to be hearing from you! 🙂
P.S. I did read carefully TWICE the entire article before posting this comment.
Guy: In response ….
1. the great commission is a word to all apostolic workers. that’s why Paul told Timothy, an apostle, to do the work of an evangelist. But as I’ve pointed out, not all are called to be apostles or evangelists. The NT doesn’t move on that. Christians spread the gospel by their lives and words, not out of commission or duty. That’s perhaps the main point.
2. as I’ve pointed out in my article DISCIPLE, MISSION, AND THE CHURCH: A PLEA TO LEARN OUR HISTORY http://frankviola.wordpress.com/2009/07/26/discipleship-mission-and-church-a-plea-to-learn-our-history/ THE WAY that the apostles “made disciples” was by planting the ekklesia. That has yet to be refuted. And they are still made today that way. I submit it’s the best way of making them.
3. If God sent you to Ecuador, then praise the Lord. Fulfill your calling. But many push their own calling onto others. That’s one of the points.
4. Your comment about sitting around marveling at the eternal purpose eludes me. If that happens somewhere, it shows they’ve not really seen that purpose. At the same time, evangelism is done “in season.” Acts makes this very plain. I don’t fault the church of Jerusalem for not evangelizing their first 4 years. They were getting to know the Lord in community. They weren’t marveling at the eternal purpose, they were living it.
5. I think you’re doing a great work and applaud you in it. Those who are active in evangelism and have a heart for it can tend to put it on God’s people as a duty without understanding some of the dynamics of evangelizing in the Spirit vs. in the soul. And they tend to read any nuance re: evangelism, such as my post, as being anti-evangelistic. I think you may be encouraged by my reply to Rick. I think we’ve forgotten the first point about the race track.
6. disagreeing with 2% of what I’ve written is impressive. I’m not sure I can beat that myself! 😉
What resonated most with me was this line, “Sharing Christ was and is a spontaneous thing that issues forth from one’s life in Christ and his or her love for others.” It brought to mind a scripture that I memorized many years ago, Ephesians 2:10 (NIV) “For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” I’ve always felt that the words ‘God prepared in advance’ were surely an indication that He will present the opportunities to me and I would know them by His indwelling Holy Spirit. Always be open and ready and willing to share in God’s time. Any other time usually renders it a disaster.
Good point, Rose: Note that Ephesians 1 and 2 are without duty or obligation. they are instead an unveiling of the glories of Jesus Christ. Paul was talking to churches, corporate communities of believers who had a shared life together. He said in chapter 2 that she, the church, was God’s masterpiece. That’s what workmanship means in the Greek. This is a spiritual fact, not a duty. She does good works when she lives by her Lord. That cannot be stopped.
Clearly the guilt tactics should be avoided. At the same time, we need to be challenged concerning our calling and walk, as is often done in the NT. God has predestined believers for good works and good works for us to perform. Good works include good words.
We are called out of darkness to walk in and thereby bear witness to the light; we have been transferred from the domain of darkness to the kingdom of God’s beloved Son and set apart as a (mediating) priesthood to proclaim God’s excellencies; our lives are to spill over in gratitude and praise to God wherever we go.
This cannot help but be seen and heard by others. Our lives should be all about magnifying Christ. This includes contending for the faith, a charge delivered to all saints in Jude 3, and being ready to give an answer for the hope that is within us (should we give folk a reason to ask or accuse). James explains how our faith must be shown real by our deeds. If we are loving God and our neighbor as ourselves, a message will be conveyed. Love speaks the truth too.
The bride of Christ cannot help but speak of her Beloved. He is her delight and boast. Showing and telling His worth to others, and encouraging them to love Him, too, is essentially what evangelism and discipleship are all about. As we raise our children in the fear and admonition of the Lord, and love our wives like Christ loved the church, we are making disciples.
It seems to me this should be our natural stride as Christians. As we let our light shine and acknowledge Christ before men, He acknowledges us before His Father in heaven.
“But I will hope continually and will praise you yet more and more. My mouth will tell of your righteous acts, of your deeds of salvation all the day, for their number is past my knowledge. With the mighty deeds of the Lord GOD I will come; I will remind them of your righteousness, yours alone. O God, from my youth you have taught me, and I still proclaim your wondrous deeds. So even to old age and gray hairs, O God, do not forsake me, until I proclaim your might to another generation, your power to all those to come” (Psalm 71:14-18, ESV).
Rick: thanks for the comment. Let me add that sharing Christ with others is an organic thing WHEN God’s people are consumed with their Lord. And it happens in season and when the Spirit compels. BUT THE CHALLENGE IS TO PURSUE JESUS CHRIST, TO TOUCH HIM, KNOW HIM, AND DISCOVER WHAT IT MEANS TO LIVE BY HIM.
The fact is, by their own testimonies, so many Christians I’ve met have never had a deep revelation of Jesus Christ to where they were delivered from duty and walked by the Spirit, so there’s a fear in reading a post like this that says, “Yea, but we gotta command and put obligation on their heads or else.” I again come back to just one example that I gave in a recent interview:
One of the young men in an organic church that I relate to was a leader in a very large para-church organization that’s known for evangelism. About a year ago, he said to me after one of our gatherings, “I just go back from one of our leadership conferences and the more they talked about saving the lost, the more disinterested I was. I come to these meetings here and while nothing is said about evangelism, I’m so excited about my Lord that I want to share Him with others. There’s no guilt or duty in it at all. I’m fired up about Him.”
I’ve seen this happen so many times I’ve lost count.
Wow, Frank, this “quick and cursory” post is anything but for most of us! 🙂 Chock full of great thoughts here. As with much of the material I’ve read of yours lately, you continue to challenge YEARS of teaching I’ve had. I’ll be rereading this one several times, forwarding it and sharing it. I appreciate the detailed post!
PS You should consider turning this post into an Amazon Single )
Thanks Chris. Will consider. It’s interesting how some who have imbibed Moody’s paradigm without ever challenging it can read posts like this and assume/think we are against evangelizing. It’s actually the exact opposite. Skimming will always yield a misguided conclusion.
Frank, enjoyed the post as always and you get a big AMEN from me. However, I’d like to hear how you would add to your thoughts if you were to consider the effects that the popular doctrine of hell preached as “eternal conscious torment” adds to the argument.
If our belief says people are falling off into this “fiery hell” every second of every day, does not evangelism “have” to become our default priority? Isn’t there a certain pressure and responsibility put upon us to make evangelism the number one goal.
What say you?
Thanks Rodger. That subject is really off topic, and we’d be going off on a long rabbit trail with it. I’d prefer to stay with the actual points in the post.
Hmmm…..
The gift of evangelism is given to the body.. to encourage and equip the body. Not all will have the “gift” in this area, but we are called to do the work of an evangelist, be salt and light, preach the gospel, and share the hope that we have, testify to Christ’s work in our lives, share the mystery of Christ with others.
To me it is obvious that Christ has a heart for the lost- the parables of the Lost Coin, Lost Sheep, and Prodigal Son. His story from Creation to Christ, shows me he is a missional God that seeks to save that which is lost. How can they hear unless those are sent.
I do agree that a simple/organic expression of the body is the best way to show God’s heart and share his message with the lost. However God blesses different expressions of His church as well.
I am not an advocate for tracks.. although God has used them and blesses forms of evangelism I’m not comfortable with. However, I don’t agree with the statement that nowhere in the scriptures does it say for us to be an evangelist. Unless you are referring to him using the term”evangelist”. But is seems clear that he exhorts us to do what we would contemporarily call evangelism.
So are you implying that nowhere in the gospels does it say for us to share about Christ with those around us in a way that would lead them to salvation?
I just disagree…..
Because of sacrificial missions that is based on love, ministering to the poor, healings, and proclaiming the gospel…. the Gospel is spreading in places where Christ is not known. This is his heart.
As you know in Acts when sharing “The Gospel”, “Evangelizing” the Jews – the Paul and Steven, gave great examples of how to do this… they didn’t skip right to the end- Jesus on the Cross.. but they preached Christ from Creation to the Cross….revealing the mystery of Christ- the reason he came to die. I feel this is necessary and the best way to “Share” the gospel with the lost. It isn’t a message they are going to understand just by watching our lives…. it is a mystery that is revealed by the holy spirit and through the proclamation of Jesus.
No- not all new believers went form town to town like the apostles. But I believe they were sharing, testifying, with those around them. I do believe some are called to be “sent ones”….but most believers are content with hiding their light under a bushel and not sharing with those around them because of fear of rejection etc….. I know- I’m one of them.. that thought just relational evangelism would lead to salvations. It just doesn’t work.. they must hear about the mystery of Christ as well.
Blessings,
Beth
Beth: You wrote a very long post, but I don’t see that you’ve shown anywhere from Scripture where and how any of the points were off.
Simply saying “I disagree” is unconvincing.
One thing you’ll discover on this blog is that statements without Scriptural support are challenged around here.
I also have to wonder if you read the entire post . . . because it seems you missed the entire thrust that Christians reveal Jesus Christ. And what is the mission anyway? It’s the eternal purpose, not salvation of the lost. (See the related links.) The traditional D.L. Moody paradigm simply isn’t in the Scriptures. If we’re wrong on that, please show us where and how. 🙂
I love this, and it’s so true: “But if you preach the glories of the Lord Jesus Christ to where God’s people are intoxicated with Him, you’ll have a group of fire-brands that will naturally share their Lord as opportunities arise.” Great article.
Great post!
My son joined a college campus church in his freshman year, and they tried to teach him top present the “gospel” to his non-believing friends in 5 minutes, give them a chance to respond or not, and then leave them behind (maybe with Kirk Cameron?) and not hang out with them anymore. He refused to do this, and was branded a troublemaker, etc. He had to extricate himself from the group as they pursued him in a cult-like way at the end of the year.
The mistake made is thinking that the Goispel is something we “do” to people, when really, the Gospel just “is”…it’s Good News, and we don’t do Good News to people, it is just what it is, and it is shared and spread around (much in the same way as Bad News is shared…much more readily, it seems – just watch the Evening News to see what I mean!)
Thanks again
Jim Black
Frank,
Thank you so much. A friend and I were just discussing this the other day. She has several friends who are unbelievers with whom her beliefs come up in conversation from time to time spontaneously. she wondered if she should not do more. I will pass this on to her as it will confirm what I said to her.
I remember back in the 90’s reading John Wimber’s “Power Evangelism” in which he speaks of our need to be in tune with Holy Spirit as only he knows where people are. Wimber used a number line to illustrate that everyone is either to the left or right of o on that line. 0 being the point where they come to the cross. Our place is to ask Holy Spirit to help us be instramental in getting someone a bit closer to that point or a bit further along after that point.
I have used this and taught it many times since. It takes so much pressure off to trust Holy Spirit to lead us instead of trying to make it happen ourselves. Thank you again for the encouragement. They will know us by our love for one another.
Blessings,
E
By and large, an excellent post Frank. “evangelism” is a privleged oportunity not a guilt prodded obligation. Your point that there isn’t one single New Covenant command to believers to evangelize has been one of the most bewildering oversights in the majority of the Body of Christ for decades.