| |
INTRODUCTION
WHAT'S WRONG WITH EVANGELISM TODAY?
Truth and unity
Evangelicals know that all is not well in their churches and missions.
Behind the facade of glowing missionary reports and massive statistics
there is a profound awareness that the church has little power in
evangelism. While bravely trying to produce an aura of joy and victory
among their followers, church leaders are uneasy and deeply
dissatisfied with their present experience and the results of their
efforts.
The church is astir with questions about evangelism and hope for
revival. Never have there been more missionaries. Never have there
been more evangelistic campaigns. Never were more Christians studying
to do personal evangelism. Never were there such enormous conferences
to examine seriously the causes and cure of lameness in the Gospel
ministry.
In 1966, 165 mission agencies and fifty-five schools convened at
Wheaton, Illinois in a Congress on the Church's worldwide Mission.
Their task was to address themselves to the barriers preventing
success in a world evangelistic thrust. Soon after that, 1300 men of
100 nations met in Berlin. They fervently hoped that this Congress on
Evangelism would 'light the fuse for a worldwide evangelistic
explosion.' In 1969 great numbers met at St Louis to investigate and
stimulate evangelism. Other such gatherings are to be expected in the
future.
Yet the bewilderment is deepening among missionaries and local
churches. After analyzing, evaluating, praying and hoping, missions
are not revitalized and sinners are not turning to Christ in great
numbers. The questions are still being asked, 'What's wrong with our
evangelism? What is needed to win the world for Christ? Where is the
power of Edwards and Whitefield?'
In this honest search for God's power to return to the preaching of
today, evangelicals have been making some crucial errors. Those who
believe in God's Word have been grasping at the same superficial
solutions that liberalism has adopted. Relevance, respectability
(whether intellectual or social), and especially unity have become the
aims of God's people with the hope that these will revitalize a
weakened church.
'If only all Bible-believing people join together, the world will
sit up and listen,' thinks the church. Let's merge our mission boards
to pool our funds and our personnel. Let's join giant evangelistic
projects. If every evangelical joins in a common organization, we can
have greater depth of evangelism. Thus organizational unity becomes
the aim of the Gospel churches.
Having accepted the theory that unity is all-important for world
evangelism, both the church and the individual must lower their
estimate of the value of truth. In a large congress on evangelism we
could not insist on a truth of God's Word that would offend any
brother evangelical. Thus we must find the lowest common denominator
to which all born-again Christians hold. The rest of the Bible will be
labeled 'unessential' for missions. After all, unity (among
Christians) is more essential than doctrinal preciseness.
It is for just this reason that the mission societies have been
unwilling carefully to examine the root problem in preaching. Mission
boards are hesitant to answer the question, 'What is the Gospel?'
Thoroughly to answer that would condemn what many of their own
missionaries preach. It would destroy the mission society, which is a
federation of churches who have differing answers to that question. To
adopt the position of one church would be to lose the support of five
others. The whole system built on unity and generality would crumble.
The local church may not get too specific about truth either. It
may affect its harmony with the denomination or association. To define
the Gospel carefully will bring conflict with the organizations
working with teen-agers. It will prompt irritating problems with
mission boards and embarrassing disagreement with missionaries
supported for years. It may condemn the whole Sunday School programme.
Giving too much attention to the content of the Gospel will mean
friction with other evangelicals. And unity is the key to success.
Tradition in evangelism
Evangelicals cherish their Reformation heritage. We stand in the line
of Luther and others who have broken the back of Papal superstitions.
The Bible, God's Holy Word, is our guide in all things. We bow to no
human authority.
Such a claim flows from a right spirit of supreme allegiance to
God. Yet the cry 'Sola Scriptura' is more often an indication of good
intention than it is fact. The evangelical wing of the Protestant
church is saturated with doctrine and practices which have no Biblical
foundation. Many teachings and habits touching the Gospel are as much
the products of human invention and tradition as were the indulgences
of Tetzel. And certain doctrines in our midst are quite as dangerous.
In the central issue of the way of salvation, large segments of
Protestantism are engrossed in neo-traditionalism. We have inherited a
system of evangelistic preaching which is unbiblical. Nor is this
tradition very ancient. Our message and manner of preaching the Gospel
cannot be traced back to the Reformers and their creeds. They are much
more recent innovations. Worse, they cannot be traced to the
Scriptures. They have clearly arisen from superficial exegesis and a
careless mixture of twentieth-century reason with God's revelation.
The resulting product is a dangerous conglomerate - just the sort
that Satan uses to delude the souls of sinners. What cult has not
learned to use verses of the Bible and half truths to establish their
lies? That has been the Devil's strategy from the beginning [Genesis
3:5]. By selling another gospel to our generation, Satan has been
employing many sincere men in preaching a dethroned Christ. The
glories of the Saviour are being hidden even from His servants because
preachers will not give careful attention to the Gospel of God's Word
alone.
Products of modern evangelism are often sad examples of
Christianity. They make a profession of faith, and then continue to
live like the world. 'Decisions* for Christ' mean very little.
* To become a Christian, a sinner must decide to
turn from sin and trust the Saviour. Repentance and
faith are inward acts of the human will. But these
must be carefully distinguished from the outward
procedure of going forward, verbally confessing sin
and publicly asking Christ to be one's Saviour. In
this paper the term 'decision' will refer to the
formal ceremonies connected with evangelistic
services; for these have become identified with
'decisions' in the evangelical mind, with the
unfounded assumption that participants in outward
ceremonies have inwardly decided to follow Christ.
Only a small proportion of those who 'make decisions' evidence the
grace of god in a transformed life. When the excitement of the latest
campaign has subsided, when the choir sings no more thrilling
choruses, when large crowds no longer gather, when the emotional hope
in the evangelist's 'invitation' has moved to another city, what do we
have that is real and lasting? When every house in our mission village
has been visited, what has been done? The honest heart answers, 'Very
little.' There has been a great deal of noise and dramatic excitement,
but God has not come down with His frightful power and converting
grace.
All of this is related to the use of a message in evangelism that
is unbiblical. The truth necessary for life has been hidden in a smoke
screen of human inventions. On the shallow ground of man's logic,
large numbers have been led to assume they have a right to everlasting
life and have been given an assurance which does not belong to them.
Evangelicals are swelling the ranks of the deluded with a perverted
Gospel. Many who have 'made decisions' in modern churches and been
told in the inquiry rooms that their sins have been forgiven, will be
surprised as Tetzel's customers to hear, 'I never knew you; depart
from me' [Matthew 7:23].
Many of you who read these pages have inherited practices and
teachings which you have assumed to be the right way of evangelism.
You have never seen a lively church actively evangelize in any other
way, so you have never questioned it. I know that there are some who
claim to possess a more precise theology of evangelism who do nothing
to win sinners to Christ. Absence of evangelistic zeal is a dreadful
predicament on one hand. But there is also the danger of zeal which is
not according to knowledge. Could you be misleading souls and
misdirecting the labours of other Christians? Have you closely
examined your message and methods in the light of God's Word?
Pastors, this is no idle question. Have you not wondered about
those 'converts' who are as carnal as ever? What about those who have
'decided for Christ' and you cannot tell what they decided? They are
not godly like the Saviour they profess, nor zealous for His cause.
They do not study the Word and do not mind if they are absent when it
is preached. Consequently, you know that they give no evidence of true
conversion. Have you considered the possibility that they were never
evangelized at all? Have your preaching and methods led them to
comfort apart from Christ?
Unless our churches rethink the way of salvation by an honest
search of God's Word, evangelical Protestantism will be choked in the
morass of human tradition, as was Rome years ago. Already many of its
members are shackled as sadly as the ignorant subjects of the Pope.
Unity must not be sought at the expense of the Gospel.
Many case histories of our Lord's personal evangelism and many
apostolic sermons would serve well for defining the Gospel. Jesus'
interview with the rich young ruler has been chosen because it is a
vivid instance of the elements essential to Gospel preaching which are
found everywhere in the New Testament. The words of Mark 10:17-27
stand in stark contrast with the prevailing doctrine of evangelicals
today. The difference between today's gospel and Jesus' Gospel are not
in minor details, but in the core of the matter. Modern changes are
serious enough to grieve the Spirit and yield empty nets. They are
dangerous enough to misguide souls for eternity.
Some will immediately retreat behind the convenient shield of
relativism. The excuse, 'It's only a matter of emphasis,' will be used
to escape a serious sel-examination in light of God's Word. But the
ensuing contrasts between Christ's Gospel and today's popularized
'gospel' are crucial, not peripheral. In these contrasting messages
may lie the difference between life and death for a soul, between
vitality and sterility for a church.
No sincere Christian intends to deceive sinners. In love for souls,
true evangelicals invariably present some profound truths in their
witnessing. Yet by the unconscious omission of essential ingredients
of the Gospel, many fail to communicate even that portion of God's
Word which they mean to convey. When a half truth is presented as the
whole truth, it becomes an untruth.
Though the answers may be painful, you must ask if your church,
your missionaries, your evangelists, Your Sunday School teachers, and
you, yourself, are preaching our Lord's Gospel. Though the answer may
bring discomfort, conflict, misunderstanding, and loss of friends, you
cannot dishonour God by ignoring His truth. If you are unwilling to
take a firm stand on the content of the Gospel, then say no more about
zeal, sacrifice and activity. If you are not willing to insist that
the 'story to tell to the nations' be precisely Jesus' story, why go
on with 'evangelism' and 'missions' at all?
Look closely then at the Master Evangelist of all ages. Listen to
His message, observe His motives, and note His methods. Then reflect
on your own ministry. In the young man of 30 AD you will see the faces
of young men of 1988. To reach them, you must say what our Lord said.
To please God you must labour as Christ laboured. Cast off the
shackles of evangelical traditions! Refuse to pay for outward unity
with the coins of fundamental truth. Learn to follow the Christ of the
Scriptures in evangelism. Lay hold of the authentic Gospel and discard
the synthetic.
I
PREACHING THE CHARACTER OF GOD
And when he was gone forth into the way, there
come one running, and kneeled to him, and asked
him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may
inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto Him, Why
callest thou me good? there is none good but one,
that is, God.
[Mark 10:17, 18]
The rich young ruler's assets
A glance at the young man who came to Jesus indicates that he was a
person worthy of your esteem and confidence. He was a 'cleancut'
youth. He greeted your Lord with abundant courtesy: 'kneeled to him'
and called Him, 'Good Master'. His deep interest in religion must
command your respect. He 'came running' to Christ in enthusiastic
pursuit of spiritual help. So anxious was he to secure 'eternal life'
that he could not wait for a private conversation. On the highway he
ignored the public's attention to inquire after his soul's welfare.
Further, he was a man of moral action. When Jesus began to remind
him of the commandments, he responded. 'All these have I observed from
my youth' [verse 20]. His life was visibly pure. When Jesus said, 'Do
not commit adultery', he could sincerely report that he had been
chaste. To our Lord's command, 'Do not steal,' he could say that he
was honest in business. His wealth was not gained by fraud. He had
always respected his parents. He was no slanderer. Such integrity was
not occasional or newly acquired. Rather, morality had been woven into
his habits 'from his youth.'
Verse 22 tells us that the fellow 'had great possessions.' He was
successful in the world. Luke 18:18 calls him a 'ruler' - a nobleman
of authority and influence. Matthew 19:20 says he was a 'young man,'
which makes his accomplishments more surprising. 'A worthy candidate
for the Citizen of the Year Award', you might think. And certainly you
would love to have him as a trophy for Christ. You would be delighted
to see him confess Jesus and join your church. Isn't it a shame that
part of your interest in such a person would stem from the carnal
suspicion that one so successful in the world would enhance God's
kingdom on earth?
What would be your reflex to such a circumstance? Here is an
outstanding fellow begging to know how he can get to Heaven! This is
the evangelist's dream! Wouldn't you open your Bible and ask him
essential questions? 'Do you believe that you are a sinner? Do you
believe that Christ died for sinners? Will you accept Jesus as your
personal Saviour? Pray this prayer after me....' He would answer in
the affirmative to each question with very little instruction. Just
show him the usual verses. This rich man was ripe for our evangelism.
Our inquiry rooms would have elicited his 'decision' in a few moments,
and give him assurance of eternal life besides. He would be added to
the statistic sheet and his conversion reported across the world. Such
a celebrity might even merit a personal write-up in the big
evangelical magazines!
Aren't you a little disappointed to see Jesus handling this tender
soul so roughly? How could our Lord use such obviously poor tactics
with a sinner? He began with rebuke, went on to talk about the Ten
Commandments (of all things!), demanded immense sacrifice as a
condition of having eternal life, and allowed the 'fish' to get away!
Didn't He know how to lead a soul to Himself? If you are surprised,
surely you are the one who doesn't understand evangelism. Look again.
Jesus' rebuke
Jesus addressed His first response, not to the ruler's question, but
to the incidental greeting given to Him. The young man had called
Jesus 'Good Master'. But our Lord refused to accept the compliment.
The inquirer was only aware that Jesus was a great teacher. He was
ignorant that he was speaking to the Christ, the Son of the living
God. The Saviour took this opportunity to say in effect, 'The goodness
of any creature (and such only, you take Me to be) is not worthy to be
named or taken notice of. It is God alone who is originally and
essentially good.'
It is true that we should not lavish our most glorious adjectives
upon men. For then what words will we use to praise God? But did Jesus
have to take the young fellow so literally? Can't we use the term
'good' to refer courteously or generally to men? Does the Lord expect
us to interrupt every conversation literally to correct all plaudits
given to fellow-creatures? What is Christ's purpose for insisting on
this minor point?
The Great Evangelist was not being petty. Nor does He expect us to
campaign against using the word 'good' to describe men. Our Master
Himself labeled righteous men 'good' [Matthew 5:45]. However, this
was not an ordinary conversation but a very intense one. Jesus was
rebuking the man for having a readiness to flatter men but little
reverence toward God. At the outset of the discussion He wished to
honour God and stir a respect for His holy character. So He seized
upon the seeker's salutation as an occasion for instruction. Jesus
began His message of evangelism by solemnly fixing attention on God's
attribute of infinite holiness or goodness.
|