Bad Evangelism
Today I had the joy of going to the happiest place on earth: Walmart. I hate the place, personally, but buying groceries there allows you to get the exact same things you can get elsewhere, for about half the price. So that’s what we have to do.
Of course, that has little to do with the point. As I took my two page list and was looking for ricotta cheese, a younger gentleman walks up behind me and says, “I see you got yourself a little list there.” I responded with, “Yeah, just a thing or two. Haha. Hopefully I can get it knocked out quick, you know.” To which he responded, “Have you ever seen one of these?”
I told him, “I’m not sure,” and he stuck a small, square booklet in between my thumb and my list, and turned and started to walk off. As he walked away, I asked what it was, and he told me it that this small booklet would tell me how to know Jesus. I stopped him and told him I didn’t need it. He insisted that I did. I told him that it might not make me a follower of Jesus, but I was a youth pastor and went to the seminary. He came back and said, “Me too! That’s great, brother! Well, maybe I’ll see you around then.”
He finally took the tract away and walked off almost as quickly as he tried to the first time. As I continued shopping, the whole encounter bugged me more and more.
For starters, I’ve had people spend more time trying to sell me a prepaid phone card or a vacuum cleaner. Secondly, a small tract like this one is supposed to suffice in sharing the most important story in the universe? Thirdly, it seemed much like a forced interaction and an imposition than I would hope evangelism would be.
I’m sure that this person was either well-intentioned or trying to fulfill an assignment for his evangelism class. Either way, this was a poor attempt at sharing the most important message the world has ever known. Is it asking too much that Christians make an effort to get to know, at least a little, the person they are confronting with the gospel? If it is a life-changing message, people need to see that. Is it too much to ask that Christians speak of the gospel more joyfully and passionately than the guy who calls Courtney and I every week trying to get us to switch cell phone service? Is it too much to ask that Christians explain the gospel? The only tract I’ve ever seen that came close to really explaining the gospel was nearly 30 pages long. While it was at least an attempt to actually tell the story of God, I doubt that anyone would actually take the time to read something like that, when it was all but thrown at them by a random stranger. Additionally, while I’ve known people to come to faith in Jesus through a variety of avenues, I’ve never actually met someone who was “saved” because of a tract left lying around.
I wish we would be more diligent at faithfully sharing the message of Jesus. I wish Christians would stop placing “How to Get to Heaven from Wake Forest” tracts on the urinals. I wish Christians would stop leaving bad tips at restaurants and putting a tract on “Are You Sure You Know Where You Will Go When You Die?” with the bad tip. Take the time to get to know someone and let them see how life-altering the message of Jesus has been. Don’t assume that anyone actually understands or shares all the presuppositions that underlie the Romans Road or the 4 Spiritual Laws. The harder road is the better road.
Alan,
Don’t think that is the worst attempt at evangelism. At least the guy wasn’t trying to be offensive. I think the guys who get in your face & tell you to repent or you are going to hell without even any prior conversation are much worse.
A short gospel presentation can be good. In evangelism class, among other things Dr. Fish taught us to present a concise presentation of the gospel in under 5 minutes. I find it useful as a way to insert the gospel within a normal conservation.
DH
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 4, 2008
Yeah, if I thought it was the worst attempt, I would have called it “Worst Evangelism” instead of “Bad Evangelism.” A good summary of the gospel is important, but when it seems like a hit-and-run instead of an attempt at sharing the greatest story in the world, and the greatest thing that’s ever happened to you, it is poor. That’s all I’m saying.
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 4, 2008
Alan, I’d definitely say you’ve got a right to be frustrated. I personally blame the Gospel. Any Gospel that can be communicated through an impersonal booklet isn’t the Gospel presented in Scripture.
So I guess I’m saying ’shame on us’ for letting this practice continue to disparage our faith and our Gospel. I’ve been trying to think up a way to take Kirk Cameron and ‘Way of the Master’ off of the air for quite a while to no avail. I think we can do it if we put our minds to it.
Earl
Comment by Earl | April 4, 2008
Alan,
The thing that concerns me the most about this type of “hit-and-run” “evangelism” is that it seems to miss the point of making disciples completely. Since the guy was so anxious to get away from you, it seems clear that he had little intention of actually discipling you. While it is great to be able to explain a concise summary of the gospel, this summary should by no means be considered actually presenting the gospel, and it certainly shouldn’t be considered “making disciples”. Both presenting the gospel and making disciples require relationship.
-Alan
Comment by Alan Knox | April 4, 2008
scatter shot never works. and i’m with you, it feels like you’re trying to sell vacuum cleaners door to door. gag me. it’s so funny how all of that stuff looks on the outside looking in.
btw, am i the only perverted mind that think it’s funny that sperm is in the title of your blog? what is that some sort of biblical latin or greek or something?
Comment by josh | April 4, 2008
Oh come on guys. It sounds like your picking on something that you know little about, or have had little experience with.
First off, cut some slack with this guy that was trying to share The Gospel. At least he was trying. Maybe it was one of his first times at stepping out.
Considering the fact that only two percent of Christians share their faith, at least he was trying. Better than the guy that all he does is go to church and never try to share Christ.
We must remember that he was in a supermarket with a perfect stranger. While yes there may have been some better approaches, at least he made an effort.
Over the years, there have been many testimonies of those that have been saved by reading tracts. Someday we will all be surprised.
How is you “one on one” “perfect stranger” evangelism going?
May you be blessed as you go out,
Richard
Comment by rjperalta | April 5, 2008
Earl and Alan,
I think you both have said something pertinent. I don’t see the gospel as “agree to this and pray this prayer.” It’s just a whole lot bigger than that, and I think “salvation” without discipleship is another gospel–or no gospel at all.
Josh,
Here, is the post about my title. It is Greek, and you aren’t the only pervert. Courtney made a joke about it as soon as I changed it. I’ve wondered if that being in the title would get my blog caught by some internet filters.
On a serious note, looking at it from the outside is what bothers me. I think part of the reason people see Christians as being preachy is that “evangelism” doesn’t simply flow out of our great love and relationship with Christ, but is basically a sales pitch that isn’t all that different from someone selling vacuums or encyclopedias. And that’s how people see it.
When are you going to write about “emerging evangelism,” since the subject is on the table?
Comment by alanreynolds | April 5, 2008
Guys,
Richard has a point. I was thinking about some of my early evangelism attempts. The guy was at least making an effort. Personally, I’m not comfortable with cold-sell evangelism but it does seem to work for some.
DH
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 5, 2008
Richard,
Welcome, but try not to be so accusatory. I did give the guy credit for either being well-intentioned or forced because of class. But being that he is a seminary student, I certainly hope this wasn’t one of his first times sharing the gospel.
The problem is that this is probably how the guy was taught to “share his faith.” But even you admit that it probably isn’t the best way. We should be teaching, in church and seminary classes, a better approach than drive-by-evangelism, and salvation without discipleship. I was a notch in his belt and a check in a box. The worker at the store who tried to help me find fennel seed cared about me more than this guy did.
I speak only for myself, though I’m sure Dee, Alan, Earl and Josh have done their share. But I’ve studied EE and Sharing Jesus Without Fear and the Romans Road and taken evangelism classes and the whole deal. If I were a stranger to it, I wouldn’t be critical of the approach. But you must admit, sometimes the best of intentions can lead to the worst of results.
Comment by alanreynolds | April 5, 2008
Alan,
Working at a Christian Bookstore I run into a lot of Christians and many people believe that confrontational, hit it & run evangelism or similar methods are actually very good ways to evangelize. One of the things I learned from Dr. Roy Fish during my evangelism classes was the need to be open to witnessing opportunities, little things that open the door for evangelism.
DH
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 5, 2008
Dee,
I certainly am open to opportunities. I’ve talked about the message of Jesus with strangers many times. I’m intentional and all that stuff. My point is that I was no more interested in what he was handing me than I would have been a brochure on the newest hair gel. And if I hadn’t asked him what it was, I would probably have simply stuck it in my pocket thinking it was something alone those lines. Of course, someone selling hair gel would have taken more time to talk with me.
I’m sure many Christians believe drive by evangelism to be a good thing, but that doesn’t make it so. I once thought it was a good thing myself, but the only worse type of “evangelism” would be the “turn-or-burn” type. It’s largely ineffective, and almost never concerns itself with making disciples. And when we sound like we are giving a sales pitch for Amway, we can expect for people to think of us as such. The gospel simply deserves so much better.
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 5, 2008
It seems that perhaps we’re talking about apples and oranges while discussing ‘the gospel’.
I’d say that ‘believe in Jesus and go to heaven’ isn’t the Gospel I preach. I don’t think a prayer enters a person into the local Christian community nor does it enter a person into God’s Kingdom. Following Jesus, imo, is what enters a person into the Kingdom. I’m sure that a propositional statement of ‘will you follow?’ needs to come at some point, we can’t do ‘relationship evangelism’ without the inevitable propositional evangelism- But my Gospel is ‘Jesus came and died so we can be redeemed and therefore participate with Him in the redemption of His creation. You get to live ‘according to the grain of the universe’ and be participatory in God’s plan for creation. AND you get to go where Jesus went when you die.’
I guess the rub is when and how to do it. And I would say that the when and how should be 1) determined by the Spirit of God and 2) by the culture. I highly doubt the Spirit prompted this seminarian to give Alan the gospel since he’s most likely already participatory in redemption and 2) in our post-Christendom culture prosylization is largely ineffective and shunned by our society because of the large abuses it has experienced at Christianity’s hands in the past. 100 years ago you could preach on a corner and get a crowd to listen- now you’re just making Jesus look bad.
c’mon, we don’t want to make Jesus look bad, do we?
Earl
ps- sorry I went off so much, alan.
Comment by Earl | April 5, 2008
Alan,
Guess, my take on the guy is that maybe he is inexperienced. I can remember my early attempts at witnessing being very bad. Of course, it does sound that we agree about witnessing.
Dh
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 5, 2008
Alan et. al.,
Actually, my comments above about “hit-and-run” evangelism are both theoretical and experiential. For many years I was taught, I practiced, and I then taught others “hit-and-run” evangelism. While we were taught how to count our numbers and demonstrate the effectiveness of the process, there are actually very few changed lives to show for it. Oh, there were many prayers and even a few baptism… but changed lives? Not many at all.
-Alan
Comment by Alan Knox | April 5, 2008
I don’t think it’s really fair to knock tract evangelism. It is the means of most people in the world coming to Christ.
Comment by Justin | April 5, 2008
Earl,
Thanks for clarifying your point, and don’t worry about going off. It’s totally great.
Dee,
OK. I hope it was simply inexperience and not actually the apathy it seemed.
Alan,
Thanks for adding from your experience. That’s basically exactly where I’m at and what I’ve seen.
Justin,
Reference? And, what about the lack of discipleship involved with tracts? What did people do before Jack Chick?
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 6, 2008
thanks for the clarification on the title.
and for the record, you could all just become heretics like me and kick evangelism to the curb in favor of an opting-out of God universalism . . .
just kidding. but seriously.
Comment by josh | April 6, 2008
Alan –
Fifty-three percent of all who come to Christ worldwide come through the use of printed gospel literature.
–Jamie Morgan
Firstly, I would say that I would not use Chick tracts. Secondly, a saved Christian will go to church and can be discipled. If the person is someone you know personally and you share verbally with, then you can have the joy of discipling the person, but that is not the only way for it to happen. I prefer conversations, I just am defending gospel tracts. If it is the gospel/Holy Spirit that brings people to Christ, then we cannot dismiss certain methods even if they are not very “cool”.
Comment by Justin | April 6, 2008
Justin,
I’m impressed you pulled up actual numbers, so kudos. Question though, how can we assuredly equate ‘come to Christ’ to mean follows Christ diligently daily?
Second question, you’re using a rather pragmatic approach to evangelism. Are we sure we want to say that the end justifies the means? Just because God can change someone through something doesn’t necessary make it correct or good, does it? Shouldn’t the burden of proof for contemporary effectiveness lie in the method, not those in opposition to the method? imo, we should be skeptical of any practice and scrutinize it for cultural relevance and effectiveness.
ok, that was a lot more than 2 questions but I’d still love to hear your thoughts.
Earl
Comment by Earl | April 6, 2008
Thank you both for your thoughts. Justin, I was going to ask basically the same thing Earl did, but I would also add a question as to the legitimacy of that statistic. Not saying it’s wrong, but we’ve all known people to twist statistics. Anyone who has studied statistics knows there are many factors playing into the relative accuracy of statistics. Also, as someone who has been involved in Evangelical Christianity for over 10 years, and has done a fair amount of proselytizing, I’ve never known anyone to come to faith in Christ through tracts.
But, back to the story in this post, it wasn’t so much that he had a tract, but that he shoved it in between my grocery list and thumb and tried to hurry off. If we had talked and one of us had to run and he offered a tract to make sure I had something about Christ, then I would not consider this “bad evangelism.” I trust you see the difference.
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 6, 2008
Justin,
Where did you get your stats? Also, not all “saved Christians” will or know to go to church to be discipled. BTW, what is a “saved Christian” as a opposed to a Christian.
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 6, 2008
I’ve been looking for Jamie Morgan, and I can’t find anything but an actor and an athlete. But this article about a group called Vision New England, says that 71% of recent converts cited a personal relationship with a Christian as the main reason they came to faith, followed by Church involvement. Confrontational evangelism only led 14% to Christ, and that may or may not involve the use of a tract. So at best, according to this article, 14% of Christians came to faith through tracts, and I’m sure it’s not actually that high.
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 6, 2008
“We have some interesting statistical information regarding the results of tract distribution. Bill James, a layman at First Blairsville who has been in the business of printing and distributing tracts for years, has calculated that .03 of one percent of those who are given a gospel tract come to faith in Christ.
In a recent telephone conversation, Mark Brown of the American Tract Society confirmed that those statistics were consistent with what he had heard. In other words, if one thousand tracts are distributed statistics show that 3 persons will pray to receive Christ.” –The Christian Index (publication for Georgia Southern Baptists), article from October of 2004.
I’m not trying to jump into or cause an argument, I’m just also curious about the 53% statistic, considering I found this.
Comment by Courtney | April 6, 2008
I want to clarify before anything else is said: I’m not saying I’m against tracts–if 3 people in 1,000 come to Christ, then by all means, there is some effectiveness (as also Alan is trying to point out–he never said they shouldn’t be used)…
Tracts just aren’t personally my cup of tea (for evangelism purposes), though. I was just posting this for curiosity’s sake about the statistic.
Comment by Courtney | April 6, 2008
So if 53% of people who come to faith worldwide (we’ll assume only those at this present time) came to faith through tracts, and there are 2 billion Christians worldwide, and tracts are only .03% effective, then that means we have passed out 35,333,333,333 tracts just in this generation. That’s a lot of dead trees.
Comment by alanreynolds | April 6, 2008
Personally, I became a Christian as a child & am pretty sure I had never actually read a tract. However my mom did use a “wordless book” presentation. As for Christian literature, my Bible story book and Sunday School literature were influential.
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 6, 2008
According to http://www.gospeltract.org/whytracts.html, Joey Hancock of the American Tract Society said, “Fifty-three percent of all who come to Christ worldwide come through the use of printed gospel literature.”
TheDeeZone – I guess my thought would be this. I disagree that a Christian will not know to go to be discipled. A Christian who has been born again will have a new nature who will want to be with other believers and read the Bible. Besides, a good tract or conversation could point to find a good church. As far as using the term saved Christian, I wasn’t really thinking anything of it. Sometimes I do differentiate between the saved and the professing Christians though.
Earl – My theology demands that a person who is born again will follow Christ daily. I can understand not everyone believes that, and I don’t consider that an essential so we can disagree. As far as my thoughts on scrutinizing the methods, I guess we should test it to make sure it is theologically sounds. As far as testing it culturally, that could be helpful, but not an essential within Christianity in my opinion. I am not saying tracts are the best way in America. I am just saying I don’t think we should knock them. Open air preaching I don’t think was ever culturally relevant. I think people always thought that was odd, but John the Baptist and Jesus did it.
Comment by Justin | April 6, 2008
Justin,
While you are obliviously well-meaning I greatly disagree with your stats. Especially since the stat comes from something a site that is trying to sell tracts. From what I have read in the past those stats are way to high. Tracts are not the most effective way of presenting the Gospel. While they may be useful, cold-call methods are ineffective. Giving a tract to a friend or someone with whom you have an established relationship is a different matter. The key is that you have developed relationship, hopefully providing creditability for the tract. In that case, it is the relationship not the tract that is the key.
As for discipleship it is not a matter of wanting to but a knowledge issue. Compare a new Christian to a baby. Babies want to be dry and feed. However, the baby is unable to meet these basic needs. It is the responsibility of parents and other caregivers to nurture the baby. It is the responsibility of Christians around the new Christian to nurture and guide new believers.
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 6, 2008
Obviously several opinions here as to if this guys attempts where appropriate or not.
Just for my own knowledge what is your idea of a well thought out, God ordained evangelistic attempt? What in your opinion is the best method, if there is such? Especially in a “dry” scenerio, such as a supermarket or a park even for that matter?
Comment by joshuasthoughts | April 6, 2008
Joshua,
First, I would say to be prepared to give a clear presentation. Pray that God provides opportunity to share and that you are sensitive when opportunities arise. Personally, I wouldn’t approach someone & try to dump a tract on them. However, I have had opportunities to share my faith at the grocery store with cashiers that I saw every week. Never, was it a very long encounter but something brief.
DH
Comment by TheDeeZone | April 6, 2008
Justin,
So it’s Joey Hancock and not Jamie Morgan. And they still didn’t give any background for the statistic. So now we have two contradictory statistics, one with information on their study, and the other has none.
I found the Spurgeon quote interesting. My favorite thing to do when someone quotes someone else is find the original quote in context. It comes from “The Soul-Winner.” Spurgeon tells a story of visiting a man in the hospital constantly for a week or two, having private conversations with him. Then Spurgeon says, “If private talk or preaching aren’t available….” And I noticed he says, “Have good tracts or none at all.” This is actually almost exactly what I am saying. Tracts are a last resort, while verbal, personal communication comes first. And please don’t use bad, theologically shallow tracts.
Joshua,
Welcome to the blog. For my thoughts on good evangelism, see here. Again, if the gospel is central in our lives, then it should already be well thought out, and it should be a natural overflow. By making so many programs and canned literature we plain and simple make sharing the gospel impersonal and more difficult than it has to be.
-Alan
Comment by alanreynolds | April 7, 2008
[...] Bible, Those Wonderful (Christmas) Holidays, Why I Don’t Like the Bible, and the set of posts Bad Evangelism and Good [...]
Pingback by Anniversary « spermologos | July 29, 2008
[...] Reid, who is quite an interesting person. Some of you may remember my experience with a little bad evangelism almost a year ago. Because of experiences such as that, and a preconceived notion of what an [...]
Pingback by Conservatives and the Kingdom of God « spermologos | February 10, 2009