When we speak of the Evangelism of Despair we are often met with a mixed reaction. This is particularly so when we encounter Christians who are imbued with the modern version of evangelism. It is common today to speak of “seekers” – those who desperately want to be saved. It is extremely common to encounter this terminology in combination with worship, which gives us the hybrid “Seeker Service”. (Sadly, this terminology shows a lack of Biblical understanding on at least two points.)
The problem with the “seeker” concept is related to evangelism only in a secondary way. The primary problem has to do with the Biblical view of man. In history, there have been two primary views of man regarding his post fall status. One sees man as sick; the other sees man as dead! What you believe the Bible teaches concerning man’s estate, post fall, is going to influence your view of evangelism.
To put it simply, if man is simply sick, he only needs the provision of medicine. He has the ability within himself to reach out, take hold of, and ingest any medication offered to, or requested by, himself. The dead man can do none of these things. Even if a life-giving elixir is placed in a golden chalice and then put into his hands, it will avail naught.
Here, and only here, is the root of the discussion. Can you see this? To speak of a ‘seeker service’ or of the ‘seeker’ in general, is to state that you believe that man is only sick. It is to say that Christ’s death and resurrection are merely the offering of medicine that can heal. It is now up to the “sick” to seek out that medicine, make his way to, and ingest that medicine. In such a case, your evangelism theory and practice will be based in wooing, cajoling, and coaxing the sick man to the medicine in the hope that he has enough interest and strength to drink deeply and be healed.
However, we must ask, “What if your patient is dead?” What will coaxing and cajoling actually produce? The simple answer is that it will leave you short of breath and the dead man, dead.
These questions are not meant as impertinence, but as a means to make you think. This is necessary because most Christians never stop to ask that simple question – Is sinful man sick or dead?
Then we must ask concerning results. It would be fair to say that never in the history of the Church have there been so many evangelistic programmes and evangelistic endeavours. Yet, for all of these, we are simply not impacting the world in a noticeable way. Why? Could it be that we have based our evangelistic operations on a faulty view of man?
This then leads to the all important question: Which view of man is Biblical? Is man sick or dead? The Biblical answer is that man is dead!
This answer is not popular in our day, but it is nonetheless the revealed truth of Scripture.
The clearest statement to this effect is found in Ephesians 2:1 (see also v 5), where Pauls says, “You were dead in your trespasses and sin”. Not sick, but dead (Colossians 2:13). Paul also states that “There are none righteous; none who seeks after God” (Romans 3:10-11). However, it must be clearly understood that this is not an isolated Pauline idea. This is a thoroughly Biblical concept. John, 6:44, states that the Father must “draw” the sinner. Why? John 6:65 notes that none can come to Jesus unless the Father “grants” (C.f Matthew 13:11). Why?
These positions make no sense, if man is but sick. They make total sense, if man is dead!
Man not only needs the provision of salvation – the medicine (as in the case of the sick man); he needs the medicine to be applied. The dead sinner needs the complete application of salvation. The dead sinner requires nothing less than the authoritative command of God to “live!” – and this precisely because he is dead to God. (Ezekiel 37:1-10)
Murray
Thank you for your article.
I wholeheartedly endorse the distinction posed between evangelising the sick v’s evangelising the dead.
You pose the question: “Yet, for all that endeavour, we are not impacting the world. Why? Could it be that we have based our evangelistic operations on a faulty view of man?” Is it appropriate to respond to this proposition with two further comments
1. God seems content not to be doing anything at present. It has been my observation that people come to faith in Christ at times in spite of the preaching that they receive rather than because of it. I have a number of friends who have come to faith from out of the Roman Catholic church, an institution not especially renowned for its Calvinism. Moreover the fruitfulness of Billy Graham’s ministry seems evident and his starting point is thoroughly Arminian.
Thus might it also be true that the paucity of impact is because God is content not to be doing anything salvific at present?
2. Life determines consciousness. Any assessment as to whether we are impacting the world is necessarily based on data to hand. It is true that the Western world seems impervious to the gospel, but there are still encouraging reports of vibrant faith and growing numbers in other parts of the world, and continents other than our own. Given that this is so:
a) Might your disparagement as to lack of impact be a localized observation rather than a worldwide phenomenon?
b) Is it certain that for those areas where growth and impact are in evidence, that the gospel set forth is done so in Reformed fashion?
None of this is to diminish the truth and relevance of your article, but to posit that the factors may be broader than what is presented therein.
Many thanks for taking the time and effort to write as you have.
Chris
Good day, Chris,
Thank you, yet again, for the comments and questions.
This reply starts with a simple statement: It is not possible to truly canvass the entire gamut of this subject in a few 600 word articles. There will be, by the mere fact of this restraint, holes! Thus, I have sought to pick on a few areas that seem to highlight our failures in understanding and direction.
To respond:
1. We work to the Ideal not the Actual. I have been called an “idealist” on many ocassions. Supposedly, that term is meant to ‘silence’ me or ‘put me in my place’. Personally, I accept the title as an honour. As Christians we have but one goal — the Ideal. We have perfection as our goal. “Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect!” “Be holy as I am holy.” “Be conformed to the image of Christ.” These statements do not admit of a ‘resting on your laurels’ mediocrity that is so common today. The Bible does not ever accept or propose a theology of “rough enough is good enough!”
Therefore, we are obliged to pursue the ideal of God’s stated order and not accept the modern pragmatism of “whatever works” or “whatever gives the appearance of working.”
2. The Imperfect. Because we live in a world of sin does not mean that we do not pursue Point 1 with all our vigour. Equally, we must understand that a God of compassion condescends to meet us where we are in a sinful world.
Rev Prof Alistair McEwen is fond of saying, “God uses a good many crooked sticks to make a straight hit.” Throughout the course of my life I have found this to be true. The question is, What do we do with this knowledge? Do we give up on God’s decreed standard and expect that because He condescended to our frailty once that He is now obligated to repeat that action in an ever deeper downward spiral of condescension? That seems to be the expectation of our day.
The other option is that we praise the Lord that He has come to us in our need and that He has used the crooked stick. Armed with this knowledge and with all the gifts with which He imbues us, we then set ourselves to the task of faithfully implementing His standard and beseeching Him for His gracious blessing upon the standard of His word.
3. The purpose of Evangelism. This then leads us to ask, What is the purpose of Evangelism? Most today go wrong at this point because Evangelism is conceived of as only “saving souls”. This is erroneous. Properly understood, Evangelism is the restatement of the Dominion Mandate. It is the reenabling of man by God to fulfil the purpose of man’s creation.
As such, the “saving” can never be separated from the “obeying”. Jesus says, ‘By their fruit you shall know them.’ Thus, the one claiming to be saved must bring forth the fruit as evidence of that salvation.
It is interesting that so much effort goes into the “saving” on the basis of the Great Commission, but we never seem to get to the purpose of “teaching the nations to obey My commands”!
Therefore, I question the modern standards, practices, and outcomes of Evangelism. I hear of those areas of work as you mention, however, I fail to see the impact of “obeying” that should follow.
The Reformation changed the world. Kings, princes, politicians, economies, and a host of other spheres were changed by the impact of the Word precisely because salvation was never divorced from Dominion or the Lordship of Christ. Now it is. People are offered a saviour, but they are not given a Lord.
4. Preaching. It is clear that the Biblical method of Evangelism is the Preaching of the Word by the Commissioned. This fact is no longer believed today. The consequences of this are that much unsanctioned Evangelism takes place and that many preachers no longer understand their role as the mouthpiece of God.
I remember asking one minister what he was preaching on. His flippant response was, “I am going to stand in the pulpit and talk about God for 20 minutes.” In his attempted humour, he hit the nail on the head. He was going to speak “about” God. He had no concept of speaking “from” God. The whole aspect of his ambassadorial role had evaporated.
Thus, I cannot agree with your view concerning preaching. It would seem more apt to see that the crooked stick was being used because the appropriate and sanctioned means had been silenced.
As stated, our argument should never be one that expresses an expectation that God lower Himself further and further to our slothfulness and ignorance simply because He, in His overarching sovereignty, saves outside the proscribed means at times. Rather, we should see this as a sign of His mercy and an encouragement — if God will do this, how much more will He grant power and effect to his proscribed standard.
5. Perspective. One could accuse me of a lack of perspective if Australia stood alone and we saw other countries flourishing under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
You mention the West. When you do so, you mention half the world and all the major economies. You mention those societies that were given their standing via the Reformation and a submission, to some degree, to God’s rule. Those countries have now thrown off that rule and all — I do not think that is an exaggeration — stand on the precipice.
However, what I seek people to see is the link. We have moved closer to the precipice, by denying God’s rule more openly and more explicitly. Complicit in this movement has been the growing silence on the part of the Church, which has come about precisely because of a shift in the Church’s message.
This takes us back to point 3. We have divorced salvation from Lordship. We speak to people of Jesus as saviour, but we do not proclaim Him as the Lord to be Obeyed! In this we have adopted a false view. Colossians 1:13 now reads, “He has transferred us from the domain of darkness into the paddock of neutrality where we are free to live and govern our own lives.” Thus, we have churches full of practical and practicing antinomians; those who will not yield to the obedience of Jesus Christ.
As long as the Church continues in this folly, we will not see the power of God unleashed.
6. The Witness. In conjunction with point 4, God’s other appointed means of movement is the people of God living in obedience to Him. The Gospel, the Whole Counsel of God, lived out in our lives and the life of our families has always been the Biblical norm for a testament to the nations. This point is seldom, if ever, touched upon today. Consequently, we overlook or abandon outright one of God’s appointed means.
In doing this we have underestimated the potency of the obedient life of God’s people as a tool to convict the ungodly of their foolishness. One author put it this way, “Turn on the lights and the bugs will come!” Now, some may not like the analogy, but it is true. Who are the lights? We are! Jesus says so. So, if we will not shine, how will the bugs be drawn?
We have, in clear and explicit contradiction to God’s command, adopted false means of Evangelism. We have told the family to hand out tracts while mingling with the world. We have instituted 3, 5, and 9 point programmes. We have attempted to blend in and befriend. Yet, what God commanded was, “Stand out and be different!” “Let My light shine in you!”
You see, we do not hear of personal holiness and sanctification as means to evangelism and dominion anymore. As a consequence, we are without a potent, God-ordained witness.
What do we offer people when our lives are as messed up as theirs? What triumph do we offer when our lives are bogged in sin, more than the unbeliever?
Now, this is not to sound as the “know it all” or as arrogant, however, I have witnessed great opportunities of late go begging because of this paucity. Recently, a friend passed to glory. He had suffered with a disability for many years. At his funeral, the question was posed, “Why did he suffer?” The man preaching answered by saying that he thought much about this, but could not find an answer. He then went on to add, “So, I turned to the Bible.” My heart was joyfully expectant, then I heard the crushing words, “But I could not find an answer there either!”
Then there was a group of young people. I think they were a band, trying to use music to evangelise. Their propaganda started with, “Christians do not have all the answers.”
As stated, one is not pretending to be an Oracle. However, it is important to see that both of these episodes impinged upon the doctrine of the “Sufficiency of Scripture”. God’s word did not contain answers to life’s problems, so they say, when in fact the Bible contains THE answer to life’s problems.
When the Church, particularly the families and individuals that make up the Church, begin to radiate the redemptive glory of Jesus Christ in every sphere of life, we will begin to see impact. When we choose to listen to the words, “come out and be separate”, our combined radiance will be such a witness to Jesus that the world will have to avert its eyes or be blinded.
The world will only see the completed work of Jesus when they see it in us. Therefore, we must shine. We must be the Salt and Light.
How dare we abandon our calling in this matter. How dare we tell God that His appointed means are irrelevant to our modern society.
We must contemplate the fact that the world will not see the glory of God until Jesus is magnified in the minds and lives of God’s people. This magnification cannot happen when we as God’s people are concerned only for ourselves, our happiness, and our jollies.
As Trev said recently, “It is time to return to the mountain top and to worship God as priority and in purity.” When we see God arrayed in His glory, and humble ourselves in His presence, then we will be apt to remember that He is our life and His magnifcation our priority. We matter little. We are servants of the Great King. The Great King receives honour, glory, and power; not the servant. The Great King receives honour and glory when the servants proclaim and show forth the greatness of the King as it touches and impacts their lives. This is the Biblical witness.
“The Lord is my portion; I have promised to keep thy words.”
Thank you Chris. God be with you.
Regards,
Murray.
Murray
Thanks for your response.
I like your observation that “We have divorced salvation from Lordship”. This is a prevailing and undesirable factor in the Church’s current approach to evangelism. It goes to the heart of your prudent assessment that in places where it does seem that the Holy Spirit is at work that there is “… a lack of ‘obeying’ that should follow”.
As you say, Preaching and Witness go together. Interestingly the second tends to follow the first. If we preach prosperity and self-actualization then people will testify (either orally or via life-style) that the gospel is about the benefits to self. If we preach holiness then people will tend to offer up lives which demonstrate commitment to being separate from the world.
It might seem that the latter is preferable to the former. For mine, I endeavour to preach the selflessness of the Godhead in the hope that my people will come to live lives and offer witness that is based on engagement with those around us and which evidences this aspect of God’s nature.
This I find draws me/us into a Trinitarian approach to preaching (and evangelism). How does one hold to God’s selflessness when scripture tells us that He saves for His Name’s sake (Ps 79:9, Ps 23:3) and His glory’s sake (John 12:23-28)? As best I can understand it necessitates an appreciation that it is the glory of God that each member plays their part for the sake of ensuring honour to the other.
Most beautifully we find that this effusive selfless glorification by the One of the Others in the godhead becomes our portion since Jesus prayed that He has given to us of His received glory (John 17:22). Moreover Paul makes clear that the receipt of this glory is located both in God’s sovereignty and The Cross since he reminds his readers in Rome that ” … whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” (Rom 8:30).
Chris
Hi Chris,
Your second point is interesting, my wife and I were discussing along those lines just yesterday. We can tend to make comments such as ‘the Church in the west is in a bad way.’ And I asked the question – well, what are we basing that on?
At first, I came to conclusions similar to yours. Perhaps my view is too localised to mean much. But on closer thought, it is really based on other things such as public statements by significant church leaders of various denominations; the moral state of our culture today (reflected in the media etc); our political leaders; even things such as standards in worship and presentation in church services (not to mention ABS data) that we attend around the country. None of these things in themselves answer the question, but they do underpin the original statement with a case that is stronger than at first thought.
As you say in your first point, in a sense the fact that what is currently happening is happening is in a sense proof that it is God’s will. But we must also remember that in a sense it is not His will either – and we and those around us will be held accountable for our actions on this basis. May we each be fervent and faithful in what we are doing in our sphere of influence, and may we pray for widespread movement of the Holy Spirit.
Peace be with you and yours,
Isaac
True enough Isaac.
We are expected to be faithful to our call and prayerful in our obedience in every age and no matter what the apparent fruit/outcome.
Many thanks for your comment and for the effort involved in administering the web-site.
Chris