If you could….

[Sojourner]

I've always believed the best method of evangelizing is to live your testimony--demonstrating your faith day by day by showing love even to the unlovable, and trusting in the Lord in times of great adversity, which is what true faith is.

[tango]

I've always believed the best method of evangelizing is to live your testimony--demonstrating your faith day by day by showing love even to the unlovable, and trusting in the Lord in times of great adversity, which is what true faith is.

There's certainly a lot more draw to someone who visibly lives what they preach, than to someone who talks a good talk but either doesn't live it or is sufficiently detached from the situation there's no way of knowing whether they live it.

It's just one of the reasons I tend to be wary of the kind of travelling speaker who pumps crowds with upbeat music, then gives an address, then moves on to the next town having nominally "led many to Christ" but then never bothers to follow up with any of them because they assume that's Someone Else's Problem now.

[Sojourner]

I've always believed the best method of evangelizing is to live your testimony--demonstrating your faith day by day by showing love even to the unlovable, and trusting in the Lord in times of great adversity, which is what true faith is.

There's certainly a lot more draw to someone who visibly lives what they preach, than to someone who talks a good talk but either doesn't live it or is sufficiently detached from the situation there's no way of knowing whether they live it.

It's just one of the reasons I tend to be wary of the kind of travelling speaker who pumps crowds with upbeat music, then gives an address, then moves on to the next town having nominally "led many to Christ" but then never bothers to follow up with any of them because they assume that's Someone Else's Problem now.

Yeah, traveling evangelists typically don't have the luxury of followups, which can be problematic for new converts after the initial excitement of the encounter wears off--especially when the Gospel seed doesn't take root, and adversity or distractions disrupt the experience. When you bring a baby into the world, a process of nurturing is required to facilitate proper development. Same with a brand new Christian.

While we can't all be pastors or evangelists, in our day to day life, we all have an opportunity to demonstrate to others the reality of a spiritual transformation through the power of Christ. In order to be effective however, it's important that the integrity of our testimony is validated by walking the walk as well as talking the talk. People need to see something in us they want in their lives.

[Fenris]

I've always believed the best method of evangelizing is to live your testimony--demonstrating your faith day by day by showing love even to the unlovable, and trusting in the Lord in times of great adversity, which is what true faith is.

I think this is kind of the whole point. Lead by example, show people what it's like to lead a Godly and fulfilling life, and give them the option of doing the same.

[tango]

I've always believed the best method of evangelizing is to live your testimony--demonstrating your faith day by day by showing love even to the unlovable, and trusting in the Lord in times of great adversity, which is what true faith is.

There's certainly a lot more draw to someone who visibly lives what they preach, than to someone who talks a good talk but either doesn't live it or is sufficiently detached from the situation there's no way of knowing whether they live it.

It's just one of the reasons I tend to be wary of the kind of travelling speaker who pumps crowds with upbeat music, then gives an address, then moves on to the next town having nominally "led many to Christ" but then never bothers to follow up with any of them because they assume that's Someone Else's Problem now.

Yeah, traveling evangelists typically don't have the luxury of followups, which can be problematic for new converts after the initial excitement of the encounter wears off--especially when the Gospel seed doesn't take root, and adversity or distractions disrupt the experience. When you bring a baby into the world, a process of nurturing is required to facilitate proper development. Same with a brand new Christian.

While we can't all be pastors or evangelists, in our day to day life, we all have an opportunity to demonstrate to others the reality of a spiritual transformation through the power of Christ. In order to be effective however, it's important that the integrity of our testimony is validated by walking the walk as well as talking the talk. People need to see something in us they want in their lives.

I often wonder whether these "travelling evangelists" actually do more harm than good.

It's all very well to count how many people "came to Christ" during one of their many rallies but without any indication how many of those continue to follow the numbers are worthless. And when you get the kind of situation where going forward is presented as if it's just the next part of the evening's entertainment it's hardly surprising that people leave the rally on Saturday feeling buzzed (because they just experienced an hour of upbeat music, and may or may not have had any form of encounter with God) only for that euphoria to fade by Monday and have them assuming that God left with it.

In some ways the "travelling evangelist" feels a bit like the "travelling prophet" who considers it appropriate to speak into peoples' lives based on knowing nothing about them, while not taking any responsibility at all for their words because by the time it all implodes they're long gone.

[RabbiKnife]

I may not have explained well.

A friend of mine at church is getting ready to launch a ministry targeting people that most evangelical churches spurn.

In light of that -- other than something that needs to be broken into numerous pieces -- is the content viable?
I live in a bubble that doesn't have any contact with any of the people he suggests, other than some disenfranchised former church folks.

How does one reach the outcasts and rejects of the church?  They certainly aren't walking in the door of my church this week, as we would say "Well, bless your heart" and ignore them, I am afraid.

[DavidGYoung]

Sojourner, what are your thoughts on the idea that some Christian movements have created a problematic separation of 'evangelism' and 'follow-up', when they shouldn't be seen as separate at all?

[tango]

I may not have explained well.

A friend of mine at church is getting ready to launch a ministry targeting people that most evangelical churches spurn.

In light of that -- other than something that needs to be broken into numerous pieces -- is the content viable?
I live in a bubble that doesn't have any contact with any of the people he suggests, other than some disenfranchised former church folks.

How does one reach the outcasts and rejects of the church?  They certainly aren't walking in the door of my church this week, as we would say "Well, bless your heart" and ignore them, I am afraid.

I remember reading something many many years ago about a group which, if I recall, was based on some form of occult activity (I don't think it was a coven of witches, but something broadly along those lines). It mentioned the people they rejected and finished with the article that the ones who they regarded as being no use to anybody got sent to the Pentecostals, who accepted them because nobody else would.

A guy I loosely know in my area moved from church to church to church, being quietly sidelined by every single one of them, until he ended up at a church that was up to its neck in all the toxic theology of Bethel, IHOP and the like. They accepted him. The other churches rejected him because he was divorced.

I'm always disheartened when people in churches talk about the dress code they expect people to follow, even going as far as to suggest that if someone couldn't afford to meet the dress code the church might buy them something appropriate to wear. Because, you know, it's hugely welcoming to tell someone their clothes aren't good enough but you'll buy them something that's no use to them and expect them to wear it. And we all know that God judges us based on how we dress, obviously.

The trouble is all sorts of things like this cement in the minds of people that "church isn't for people like me". Anything that gets the message out that "church is for people just like you, and you, and you" can only be a good thing. It's a shame we need to fight the mindset that "church isn't for people like me" but sadly it seems enough churches have become more like glorified social clubs with their own man-made rules of entry and conduct that that's where we are.

[RabbiKnife]

I may not have explained well.

A friend of mine at church is getting ready to launch a ministry targeting people that most evangelical churches spurn.

In light of that -- other than something that needs to be broken into numerous pieces -- is the content viable?
I live in a bubble that doesn't have any contact with any of the people he suggests, other than some disenfranchised former church folks.

How does one reach the outcasts and rejects of the church?  They certainly aren't walking in the door of my church this week, as we would say "Well, bless your heart" and ignore them, I am afraid.

I remember reading something many many years ago about a group which, if I recall, was based on some form of occult activity (I don't think it was a coven of witches, but something broadly along those lines). It mentioned the people they rejected and finished with the article that the ones who they regarded as being no use to anybody got sent to the Pentecostals, who accepted them because nobody else would.

A guy I loosely know in my area moved from church to church to church, being quietly sidelined by every single one of them, until he ended up at a church that was up to its neck in all the toxic theology of Bethel, IHOP and the like. They accepted him. The other churches rejected him because he was divorced.

I'm always disheartened when people in churches talk about the dress code they expect people to follow, even going as far as to suggest that if someone couldn't afford to meet the dress code the church might buy them something appropriate to wear. Because, you know, it's hugely welcoming to tell someone their clothes aren't good enough but you'll buy them something that's no use to them and expect them to wear it. And we all know that God judges us based on how we dress, obviously.

The trouble is all sorts of things like this cement in the minds of people that "church isn't for people like me". Anything that gets the message out that "church is for people just like you, and you, and you" can only be a good thing. It's a shame we need to fight the mindset that "church isn't for people like me" but sadly it seems enough churches have become more like glorified social clubs with their own man-made rules of entry and conduct that that's where we are.

My friend wants to call it “The Church of Misfit Toys”…. And he is serious

[tango]

My friend wants to call it “The Church of Misfit Toys”…. And he is serious

No reason not to call it the church of misfits. I don't know I'd use the word toys, but it's not my church. Maybe it will fly, who knows?

If it gets the message out to people who aren't traditionally church-going types that church is for people like them it can't be a bad thing. As long as it doesn't draw too many of the socially exclusive types who want to show their support, only to then make the misfits feel unwelcome because they don't rapidly conform to the social norms of the more exclusive places.

[IMINXTC]

Jehovah Witness modus operandi: Go to the disenchanted, spurned or otherwise disenfranchised and non-participating church members of the  Christian faith.

[Sojourner]

Sojourner, what are your thoughts on the idea that some Christian movements have created a problematic separation of 'evangelism' and 'follow-up', when they shouldn't be seen as separate at all?

I'm not sure what movements you're referring to, but I think any evangelistic endeavor should include some sort of followup. Ideally, someone brand new in the Lord should be encouraged to find a Spirit-filled, Bible-believing church with a pastor who will nurture and instruct him in the next phase of his journey. The contrivances of the enemy await one who has committed his life to Jesus, including the instilling of doubts about the reality of his experience, trials and tribulations, or disruptive diversionary tactics.

Many people came to the Lord during phenomenal Asbury revival last year, and I can only hope each person was provided with an opportunity for proper grounding in the faith. I think that includes being connected in a Bible-believing church, fellowship, and daily Bible reading. Progressive stages of development should follow the New Birth just as they do the natural birth. An infant needs proper care and nurturing as it grows, and the same is true of spiritual progression.

[RabbiKnife]

I do t know if any evangelistic campaign that preaches salvation and leaves new converts high and dry.

That’s not happening anywhere in reality

[tango]

I do t know if any evangelistic campaign that preaches salvation and leaves new converts high and dry.

That’s not happening anywhere in reality

It certainly was in my teenage years. It was quite common to see some event with a speaker, inviting people to "come forward and accept Christ" and then provided precisely zero followup. Out of all the people who went forward I often wondered how many found, as I did, that the euphoria had gone by the following morning and with a total lack of any form of followup there were a bunch of people left wondering what to do next. But, you know, they got to count the people who went forward and say how many people "came to Christ" during their events, even without showing the slightest concern how many of them stayed on course.

[RabbiKnife]

I have really never seen such a thing… the few big event things I’ve been a part of had more pre-event planning and more post event follow up that time or money spent on the preaching event itself