Evangelism

It is nearly 2000 years since the death and resurrection of Jesus and yet what is recognised as the Christian church is in decline in many parts of the world.  Most people would consider that if after 2000 years the main goals and objectives have not been reached then maybe we are doing something wrong.  For the first 300 years or so the gospel reached much of the then known world and then things seem to change.  At that time the Roman emperor Constantine decided to erect a building for worshipping God and since then it has been considered that to worship God, a building is an important way to do that. 

It would seem that when we talk of revival, we often mean that the congregation has grown and we have more members in our denomination.  But so often the community has not changed.  This is not always the case but in my experience I have found that after a while things seem to revert back to the way they were before the 'revival'.  It has also been my observation that too often when someone in need has been helped, they are silently expected to join the congregation.  It's almost an unwritten code of conduct, an expectation, a condition that is understood even if not spoken.  It would appear that help is not given simply because there is a need but as a way to gain another member.  Again, this is not always the case but too often that does seem to be the attitude.  I have heard it said when someone has not wanted to remain part of the congregation '... and after all we've done for them.'

I have recently been re-reading a book first published in 1970 called Secular Evangelism by Fred Brown.  He was working in an evangelical Christian centre in the West End of London in the early 60s and was well aware of the drop-out hippies, flower people culture of the time and desparately wanted to reach out to help them.

One of his comments on the situation was

We should stop thinking of evangelism as a means of inflating our congregations.

We think that the only way to reach anyone is to get them into the building where they can hear the gospel message.  Again Fred Brown comments

The basic trouble was that we were not identified with the people where they were; and our only answer apparently was to shout at them to come over and join us.

He, along with other leaders who were engaged in this work, came to the conclusion

We perceived the need to discover another way to communicate our Christian faith.  ... ...  God's love was worse than meaningless to them until they experienced it in and from somebody else.  To make preaching a substitute for loving or even to give it first priority was a denial of the gospel, a blasphemy that was not redeemed by its devout intentions.

Jesus was known to the religious people of His day as someone who associated with the 'not-so-nice' people, those living on the margins of society.  He Himself said that His ministry was to bring freedom to the captives and good news to the poor.  He also spoke of clothing the naked, giving food to the hungry and visiting those in prison.  He doesn't say anything about how often or where people meet together but that when we help those in need we are serving Him.  It should never be about swelling the numbers in our buildings.  It is about introducing people to the Almighty Loving God.  They may as a result join a particular group but that should not be the aim and purpose of outreach and projects.

I must admit that 'outreach' is a word I struggle with. Outreach implies going out of our comfort zone and bringing people back with us into our setting.  Jesus didn't do outreach - He identified with them.  He walked among them and loved them.  The Bible says He went about doing good.  I recently watched the film Evan Almighty where Evan was a newly-elected US congressman and wanted 'to change the world'.  I won't go into detail about the storyline but at one point in a conversation with God, God says to him that the way to change the world is by acts of random kindness.  It's not 'bums on seats' in buildings as they say but about living Jesus where we are.

I'll end these musings by quoting from two blogs that I follow.  The first one is from Roger Mitchell and he says,

The ecclesia is defined by the work of the kingdom of God in the world and not by buildings or religious practices connected to them.

There are 2 quotes from Martin Scott's blog and his writings on Gates of the City.

Transformation is not the call for a few to be involved in and is not something that takes place within four walls but must be the expression of the Body in the context of all creation.

The Body of Christ is to live in her geography as citizens of another place and dimension.  Not looking to escape ... but looking to put the imprint of heaven on the society.

The Christians of the early church have the answer - live the gospel and show the love of God where we are.  People may not want to enter the building but they will notice how we live.