At what point do we become responsible for talking against leaders like Trump?

[1Tonne]

Regarding sharing the gospel - are we in the same situation like the first church? Who today really never heard about Jesus? And whoever is interested, there is everything on the internet, in the books, some church is basically in every village etc.

Are physical people on the streets shouting the gospel into a speaker really useful?

It’s true that most people today have heard of Jesus, but hearing His name isn’t the same as understanding who He is or why He had to die. Many can’t explain the Gospel at all, or they’ve misunderstood it entirely. Sadly, I’ve asked many Christians what the Gospel is, and many cannot answer. Some say it’s Jesus, some say it’s the Bible, others say it’s our good deeds or our friendships. So even within the church, the Gospel needs to be spoken clearly.

Unbelievers often think Jesus came to start a religion, to teach good morals, or to help people be happy, but not that He died to take their place under the judgment of God. That’s the core of the Gospel, and it’s often missing, even among people who’ve "grown up around church."

As for looking it up online—how many people actually do that? Most don’t go searching for truth until someone prompts them, challenges them, or loves them enough to bring it up. Romans 10:14 puts it well: “How can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” The early church preached on the streets because it worked, and it still does. And we don’t have to preach loudly from a platform. We can simply have a personal, one-on-one conversation with someone we meet.

Street preaching, handing out tracts, or engaging in everyday conversations may not be popular, but they are obedient acts of love. The real question is not whether the method is trendy or comfortable, but whether people are actually hearing the true Gospel. If they are hearing the Gospel, then we need to trust in the power that it has to change hearts of stone into hearts of flesh.

Honestly, when believers start saying “Well, people can just look it up,” it often sounds like we’re trying to excuse ourselves from the responsibility Jesus gave us in Mark 16:15: “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to all creation.” The Great Commission was never delegated to Google—it was given to us.

 

[trophy33]

It’s true that most people today have heard of Jesus, but hearing His name isn’t the same as understanding who He is or why He had to die. Many can’t explain the Gospel at all, or they’ve misunderstood it entirely. Sadly, I’ve asked many Christians what the Gospel is, and many cannot answer. Some say it’s Jesus, some say it’s the Bible, others say it’s our good deeds or our friendships. So even within the church, the Gospel needs to be spoken clearly.

Unbelievers often think Jesus came to start a religion, to teach good morals, or to help people be happy, but not that He died to take their place under the judgment of God. That’s the core of the Gospel, and it’s often missing, even among people who’ve "grown up around church."

As for looking it up online—how many people actually do that? Most don’t go searching for truth until someone prompts them, challenges them, or loves them enough to bring it up. Romans 10:14 puts it well: “How can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” The early church preached on the streets because it worked, and it still does. And we don’t have to preach loudly from a platform. We can simply have a personal, one-on-one conversation with someone we meet.

Street preaching, handing out tracts, or engaging in everyday conversations may not be popular, but they are obedient acts of love. The real question is not whether the method is trendy or comfortable, but whether people are actually hearing the true Gospel. If they are hearing the Gospel, then we need to trust in the power that it has to change hearts of stone into hearts of flesh.

Honestly, when believers start saying “Well, people can just look it up,” it often sounds like we’re trying to excuse ourselves from the responsibility Jesus gave us in Mark 16:15: “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to all creation.” The Great Commission was never delegated to Google—it was given to us.

So, your reasoning is simply that people are not interested in God enough to do their own research and that is why you think we must still bring the message to them personally, even though they could get the same info in like 5 secs in some AI tool?

I do not know, I kind of get it, it is the same with a product marketing (people could google the product, but they are lazy, so an advertisement must push it to them), but still... it seems to me that when somebody is called by God, he is already interested and active in this area.

I also think that, in the European culture, shouting/selling something on the streets, railway stations etc. is perceived as invasive, disturbing, unpleasant and kind of being "shady", of a low quality or fanatical (if religious). Many people try to evade such interactions

 

[1Tonne]

So, your reasoning is simply that people are not interested in God enough to do their own research and that is why you think we must still bring the message to them personally, even though they could get the same info in like 5 secs in some AI tool?

I do not know, I kind of get it, it is the same with a product marketing (people could google the product, but they are lazy, so an advertisement must push it to them), but still... it seems to me that when somebody is called by God, he is already interested and active in this area.

I also think that, in the European culture, shouting/selling something on the streets, railway stations etc. is perceived as invasive, disturbing, unpleasant and kind of being "shady", of a low quality or fanatical (if religious). Many people try to evade such interactions

I understand where you're coming from, especially regarding how street evangelism is often perceived in European culture. You're right—it can feel intrusive to some, and methods do need to be thoughtful and respectful. But even so, the issue isn’t just cultural—it's spiritual.

The Bible tells us people aren’t naturally seeking after God. Romans 3:11 says, “There is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God.” People don’t generally wake up one day and start researching how to be saved—unless God is already working on them and someone shares the message with them. God’s typical method is through His people, speaking. “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17).

You mentioned marketing, and while the Gospel isn’t a product, the comparison isn’t far off in one sense: even the most important message still needs a messenger. Jesus didn’t say, “Wait for people to come to you,” but “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel” (Mark 16:15). That’s personal, relational, and sometimes public.

Yes, AI can provide information. But the Gospel is more than facts—it’s a call to repentance and faith, and it comes best through someone who lovingly explains, challenges, and encourages. AI doesn’t love people. We do—or at least, we’re commanded to.

I’m not saying we should all shout in the streets. But we should all speak to people in whatever context God gives us—whether that’s a café conversation, a workplace, a train ride, or yes, even a public square.

Ultimately, we speak not because we think people are “interested,” but because Jesus is worthy to be proclaimed, and some may respond. How will they hear if no one tells them?

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

He practices extortion and threats to get his way.

Like the liberal side doesn't?

Same coin. 2 sides

Render to whomever's face comes up on the flip. Matt. 22:21

 

[trophy33]

I’m not saying we should all shout in the streets. But we should all speak to people in whatever context God gives us—whether that’s a café conversation, a workplace, a train ride, or yes, even a public square.

I agree, different cultures, contexts, environments may require different ways. Europe may be different from Africa, South America from New Zealand etc. Somebody witnesses to a work colleague, somebody on his profile on a social network... I think that no Christian is totally silent.

My country is one of the most atheistic in the world and Christianity is still visible here. For example, in towns, villages or randomly in forests or countrysides you will come across crosses, Marian columns, chapels, with biblical verses and the like.

How will they hear if no one tells them?

I do not think it is possible that nobody tells them. For example each Christmas or Easter radios and TV's broadcast church services, these are state holidays (at least in Europe), there are Christmas nativity scenes in the public squares...in basically every school there is a history subject about Christianity or in the literature subject they learn about Bible. It is so ingrained into our culture, basic education and public life that everybody knows at least something about it.

If people go by a church building, they can read the announcements, when are the church services, contact to a pastor/priest etc. That is why I say we are not in the situation of the first apostles.

Evangelizing today is not so much about telling people the facts as if it was something hidden and new, it is more about convincing them. Which is a bit different thing.

 

[Fantine]

Like the liberal side doesn't?

Same coin. 2 sides

Render to whomever's face comes up on the flip. Matt. 22:21

Real liberals and real conservatives don't practice extortion. Both should be horrified at Trump's tactics, which are beneath contempt.

 

[1Tonne]

I do not think it is possible that nobody tells them. For example each Christmas or Easter radios and TV's broadcast church services, these are state holidays (at least in Europe), there are Christmas nativity scenes in the public squares...in basically every school there is a history subject about Christianity or in the literature subject they learn about Bible. It is so ingrained into our culture, basic education and public life that everybody knows at least something about it.

Everyone knows of Jesus, Christmas, Easter, and the cross, but knowing about these things isn’t the same as understanding the Gospel. I’ve had many conversations where people were genuinely surprised when they finally understood why Jesus had to die and what it means for them personally. They’d heard the words before, but the meaning hadn’t sunk in.
I recall speaking to 2 boys at a park bench who said that they went to a Catholic School. When I explained the Gospel and why Jesus had to die for them, one of them jumped in his seat, and I knew it had gone into him. He said, "I have heard that many times and now I understand." He was shocked that he had heard the message so many times, but it had simply gone over his head.

Cultural exposure to Christianity doesn’t equal comprehension. In fact, familiarity can sometimes create a false sense of understanding. That’s why we’re still called to explain the Gospel—not just assume people already grasp it.
Even Paul, writing to people who had heard the Scriptures read every Sabbath, still said: “How can they believe in the one they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14).

So yes, evangelism today often involves both proclaiming and persuading. But the first step is still sharing the message—clearly and personally—because most people don’t understand it as well as we think. That's why Jesus still says, “Go.”

 

[Valletta]

1. When does it become our responsibility to discern truth for ourselves and stop blindly trusting what we’re told,- whether that message is for or against a leader?

The responsibility part is difficult to quantify because we all have to rely upon some sources. I knew there were problems with the government, but once I got involved I was absolutely astounded at just how much dishonesty is accepted in Washington and the degree to which the media backs corruption in the establishment.

 

[Marston]

The German people, for example, were also swept up by positive portrayals of Hitler.

The Nazis only received 44% of the vote in the 1932 elections. The majority of Germans opposed Hitler.

 

[Marston]

2. And if the media we're listening to is constantly negative about a leader, at what point do we become responsible for spreading lies, slander or gossip?

It's necessary to know what the Bible says about being "of the world". Then ask yourself, does the media serve the world or does it serve God?

 

[Fantine]

It's necessary to know what the Bible says about being "of the world". Then ask yourself, does the media serve the world or does it serve God?

The media can promote evil or good, or be good old escapism.
You obviously think the media is too critical of Trump. (Really, you could criticize him 24 hours a day and still miss some things.)
And some of it comes down to frustration. I feel it. All my friends see it.
His flaws (or sins if you prefer) are as blatantly obvious and inappropriate as Fetterman's attire in the halls of Congress.
We're there shouting the emperor has no clothes and he's not 228 pounds to seemingly hypnotized people.
Criticism doesn't work but kidnapping and deprogramming is probably illegal.

 

[1Tonne]

The Nazis only received 44% of the vote in the 1932 elections. The majority of Germans opposed Hitler.

The Nazi Party received about 37% of the vote in 1932. (not 44% — they peaked at 37.4% in July, then declined to 33.1% in November).
While it's true that the Nazis only received about 37% of the vote in the 1932 elections—meaning most Germans initially opposed them—that changed dramatically once Hitler came to power. Through propaganda, suppression of opposition, and early foreign policy successes, public opinion shifted. By the time Germany invaded Poland in 1939, there was widespread support for Hitler and the war effort, even though it had not been that way in the early 1930s. The difference highlights how authoritarian regimes can reshape public sentiment over time with propaganda. And so our views can also be changed by our current media stations that we listen to.

It's necessary to know what the Bible says about being "of the world". Then ask yourself, does the media serve the world or does it serve God?

That’s a fair point — the Bible does warn us about being “of the world.” But it also warns us against bearing false witness and spreading slander, regardless of who the target is. That’s why we need to be careful with both what we consume and what we share — whether it’s from secular media or Christian sources. Truth and integrity should guide us in all cases, not just our opinion of the source.

 

[Marston]

The Nazi Party received about 37% of the vote in 1932. (not 44% — they peaked at 37.4% in July, then declined to 33.1% in November).

Ah yes. Thanks for looking that up and correcting me.

A lot of people have the mistaken belief that Hitler was supported by the majority of the German people, which clearly was NOT the case.

 

[trophy33]

Everyone knows of Jesus, Christmas, Easter, and the cross, but knowing about these things isn’t the same as understanding the Gospel. I’ve had many conversations where people were genuinely surprised when they finally understood why Jesus had to die and what it means for them personally. They’d heard the words before, but the meaning hadn’t sunk in.
I recall speaking to 2 boys at a park bench who said that they went to a Catholic School. When I explained the Gospel and why Jesus had to die for them, one of them jumped in his seat, and I knew it had gone into him. He said, "I have heard that many times and now I understand." He was shocked that he had heard the message so many times, but it had simply gone over his head.

Cultural exposure to Christianity doesn’t equal comprehension. In fact, familiarity can sometimes create a false sense of understanding. That’s why we’re still called to explain the Gospel—not just assume people already grasp it.
Even Paul, writing to people who had heard the Scriptures read every Sabbath, still said: “How can they believe in the one they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14).

So yes, evangelism today often involves both proclaiming and persuading. But the first step is still sharing the message—clearly and personally—because most people don’t understand it as well as we think. That's why Jesus still says, “Go.”

Well, again, if somebody is interested in these things, he may learn everything in like 5 seconds. All the basic knowledge is there in the culture and the rest is easily available - in churches, online, in books...

Personal evangelization is really rather a persuasion of somebody who did not care enough till that moment.

 

[1Tonne]

Well, again, if somebody is interested in these things, he may learn everything in like 5 seconds. All the basic knowledge is there in the culture and the rest is easily available - in churches, online, in books...

Personal evangelization is really rather a persuasion of somebody who did not care enough till that moment.

It’s true that information is more accessible than ever, but access doesn’t equal understanding, and curiosity doesn’t always arise on its own. Most people don’t go searching for something they don’t think they need.

As the Bible says, “Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness” (Proverbs 20:6). Many believe they’re good enough to get to Heaven, so why would they seek out a Saviour? If someone already thinks they’re on the right path, they’re unlikely to go online looking for answers. That’s why we’re called to do what Jesus did, to lovingly show people where they fall short of God’s perfect standard.
Jesus said the world hated Him because He testified that its works were evil (John 7:7). In the same way, we’re not called to be popular, we’re called to be faithful. And we must do this with gentleness and respect (1 Peter 3:15). As Galatians 3:24 says, the Law is our tutor to bring us to Christ, so we use it to show sin, then we present the Gospel of grace.

The Gospel isn’t just a collection of facts to be discovered, it’s a message that confronts sin, reveals the need for a Saviour, and offers hope through Jesus. But people are spiritually blind to this until someone brings the truth to them (2 Corinthians 4:4; Romans 10:17).
Jesus didn’t say, “Wait until they ask,” but “Go into all the world.” Paul didn’t wait for interest; he reasoned with people wherever he went, even among hostile crowds. Why? Because love doesn’t wait. Love initiates.

Personal evangelism isn’t pushy, it’s compassionate. It’s stepping into someone’s life with truth before they realise they need it. We bring the truth in love because eternity is at stake.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

Real liberals and real conservatives don't practice extortion. Both should be horrified at Trump's tactics, which are beneath contempt.

No believer in their right mind should be embracing extreme leftist stands, particularly propagandist induced TDS

 

[JEBofChristTheLord]

Well, again, if somebody is interested in these things, he may learn everything in like 5 seconds. All the basic knowledge is there in the culture and the rest is easily available - in churches, online, in books...

Personal evangelization is really rather a persuasion of somebody who did not care enough till that moment.

No, none of the essential information is available to anyone, unless God cause them to believe it.

 

[trophy33]

No, none of the essential information is available to anyone, unless God cause them to believe it.

This is a nonsensical statement, IMO. The information is out there, in every Bible, in almost every protestant church, on internet. Believing in it is a totally different issue.

 

[FireDragon76]

This is a nonsensical statement, IMO. Information is out there, in every Bible, in almost every protestant church, on internet. Believing in it is a totally different issue.

There have been several surveys that actually show that many American Christians have less knowledge of their religion that many non-Christians.

Groups like Barna have also shown the average American Evangelical's understanding of theology is also very poor, so it's not surprising.

Maybe there is a risk of "the blind leading the blind". When I read the Bible and study it in its historical context, I see something quite different from American Evangelicals' assumptions about religion.

 

[trophy33]

There have been several surveys that actually show that many American Christians have less knowledge of their religion that many non-Christians.

Groups like Barna have also shown the average American Evangelical's understanding of theology is also very poor, so it's not surprising.

Maybe there is a risk of "the blind leading the blind". When I read the Bible and study it in its historical context, I see something quite different from American Evangelicals' assumptions about religion.

Yes... as Leibniz wrote in his preface to Theodicy:

It has ever been seen that men in general have resorted to outward forms for the expression of their religion: sound piety, that is to say, light and virtue, has never been the portion of the many.
One should not wonder at this, nothing is so much in accord with human weakness. We are impressed by what is outward, while the inner essence of things requires consideration of such a kind as few persons are fitted to give.