LovebirdsFlying
My husband drew this cartoon of me.
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
- Aug 13, 2007
- 28,782
- 4,237
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
It would seem to me that most Christians, if not all, are concerned about the eternal destination of the unsaved. It would also seem that those who are not, should be. This is why we make the effort to reach them in the first place. We want to show them the way out, so they don't have to end up in that horrible destination.
I do have misgivings about some of the ways in which this is implemented.
My husband preaches to anyone who tries to scam him. For example, his phone rings, and he hears what amounts to, "Hello, I am pretending to represent some United States agency, even though it is obvious from my barely intelligible English that this call is originating from some far distant country. We have a warrant for your arrest due to unpaid debts. You must transfer X amount of dollars to such and such place, or else we will send the police to your home, and you will go to jail."
Hubby immediately responds, "Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior? You'd be better off doing that, instead of trying to scam people."
Besides this being quite an effective way to get the scam artists to hang up, and it's funny too, hubby says he does it because he is legitimately concerned for their salvation. Which, in my opinion, is honorable and admirable. He does the same thing with online comment sections, such as telling obviously fake accounts that they need Jesus Christ. Now, hubby has just turned 60 years old, which to some of you may seem elderly, but in all honesty he's been set in his ways for years. No matter how logically someone explains that it was a computer program, not a person, who made that post or comment he's responding to, he's going to continue responding to it. No matter how many times he is advised not to answer those calls in the first place, because that only confirms for them that it's a legitimate number and they're going to keep calling, he will answer. He wants to make sure the person on the other end hears about Jesus. Also, even if he is replying to a comment by a computer program, *somebody* might read it.
There is merit to his thinking. And he could be right. Either he is helping to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ to the unsaved, or it's a colossal waste of his time and effort. I'm not sure. That's why I'm asking. I tend to put this method of witnessing in the same category as using, "Bless your heart, I'll pray for you," as subtle but deliberate insult. (I'm from the Southern United States myself, where it definitely is!) Yet I've also heard people testify who once were atheists, and now are believers. They may talk about someone they used to know who, every time they met, would smile and say, "God bless you." They say it used to make them SO mad, until one day it finally "took," and they gave their hearts to the Lord.
And I certainly don't want to hide my light. I want to obey Jesus and make sure I don't deny Him. Although I don't think it's my duty (because conviction is the work of the Holy Spirit) to hammer the message at unbelievers until they finally give up and believe, I feel that it is my duty to make sure everybody who knows me, knows I'm a Christian. Then if they want to know why I'm a Christian, I can tell them. How are they going to know I'm a Christian? Well, I might work into a conversation that I was on my way to or from church when this or that happened. There, now they know I go to church. The door is open just a little. As this person and I become more comfortable discussing beliefs, then I gradually explain mine. I stick to "I do/don't do X because I believe Y, for reason Z," rather than "You need to do/stop doing X, and believe Y, or else you're wrong, and all kinds of bad things will happen after you die." All the while bearing in mind, of course, that my first duty to people is to love them, and I am not their judge.
I suppose my question boils down to, is the "needle" method of witnessing necessary or effective? By the "needle" method, I mean, deliberately saying things like "God bless you" and "Jesus loves you" to a nonbeliever, knowing full well it's going to irritate them and get under their skin. Also, might my preferred method of casually mentioning church be taken as virtue signaling?
I do have misgivings about some of the ways in which this is implemented.
My husband preaches to anyone who tries to scam him. For example, his phone rings, and he hears what amounts to, "Hello, I am pretending to represent some United States agency, even though it is obvious from my barely intelligible English that this call is originating from some far distant country. We have a warrant for your arrest due to unpaid debts. You must transfer X amount of dollars to such and such place, or else we will send the police to your home, and you will go to jail."
Hubby immediately responds, "Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior? You'd be better off doing that, instead of trying to scam people."
Besides this being quite an effective way to get the scam artists to hang up, and it's funny too, hubby says he does it because he is legitimately concerned for their salvation. Which, in my opinion, is honorable and admirable. He does the same thing with online comment sections, such as telling obviously fake accounts that they need Jesus Christ. Now, hubby has just turned 60 years old, which to some of you may seem elderly, but in all honesty he's been set in his ways for years. No matter how logically someone explains that it was a computer program, not a person, who made that post or comment he's responding to, he's going to continue responding to it. No matter how many times he is advised not to answer those calls in the first place, because that only confirms for them that it's a legitimate number and they're going to keep calling, he will answer. He wants to make sure the person on the other end hears about Jesus. Also, even if he is replying to a comment by a computer program, *somebody* might read it.
There is merit to his thinking. And he could be right. Either he is helping to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ to the unsaved, or it's a colossal waste of his time and effort. I'm not sure. That's why I'm asking. I tend to put this method of witnessing in the same category as using, "Bless your heart, I'll pray for you," as subtle but deliberate insult. (I'm from the Southern United States myself, where it definitely is!) Yet I've also heard people testify who once were atheists, and now are believers. They may talk about someone they used to know who, every time they met, would smile and say, "God bless you." They say it used to make them SO mad, until one day it finally "took," and they gave their hearts to the Lord.
And I certainly don't want to hide my light. I want to obey Jesus and make sure I don't deny Him. Although I don't think it's my duty (because conviction is the work of the Holy Spirit) to hammer the message at unbelievers until they finally give up and believe, I feel that it is my duty to make sure everybody who knows me, knows I'm a Christian. Then if they want to know why I'm a Christian, I can tell them. How are they going to know I'm a Christian? Well, I might work into a conversation that I was on my way to or from church when this or that happened. There, now they know I go to church. The door is open just a little. As this person and I become more comfortable discussing beliefs, then I gradually explain mine. I stick to "I do/don't do X because I believe Y, for reason Z," rather than "You need to do/stop doing X, and believe Y, or else you're wrong, and all kinds of bad things will happen after you die." All the while bearing in mind, of course, that my first duty to people is to love them, and I am not their judge.
I suppose my question boils down to, is the "needle" method of witnessing necessary or effective? By the "needle" method, I mean, deliberately saying things like "God bless you" and "Jesus loves you" to a nonbeliever, knowing full well it's going to irritate them and get under their skin. Also, might my preferred method of casually mentioning church be taken as virtue signaling?
