Does mass evangelism really work?

[JimB]

*****
The most important part of evangelism is the "hearing" of the gospel. To some folk it might never be actually be heard unless by an evangelist at a mass gathering .
*****

Evangelistic crusades are a sorry excuse for just being Christ’s witnesses.

Someone wondered why it seems easier for us to mount a crusade against littering than to stoop down and pick up a gum wrapper. In the same way, we have this strange idea that it is easier to mount a crusade than simply share God’s love with our neighbors and co-workers.

There will never be a good substitute for doing what we have been left on eartH to do—“BE MY WITNESSES” (Acts 1.8).

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[probinson]

This parable seems applicable here;

Mark 4:3-8
3 Hearken; Behold, there went out a sower to sow: 4 And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up. 5 And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth: 6 But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. 8 And other fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some an hundred.
​

And Jesus explanation;

Mark 4:14-20
14 The sower soweth the word. 15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts. 16 And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17 And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended. 18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, 19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. 20 And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred.
​

So, what's the point? The point is, the sower sows the Word. He sowed it on good ground, bad ground, hard ground, thorny ground... regardless, the sower sows the Word. To apply it to this topic, at "mass evangelism" events, there are all types of "ground" present. But still, the sower sows the Word.

Jesus then explains why some people, that have heard the same Word, don't respond the same way, and sure enough, neither the method of sowing, nor "follow-up" was not on the list.

What was on the list was Satan stealing the Word sown from them at the wayside, affliction and persecution for the Word's sake, cares of this world, deceitfulness of riches, lust of other things.... THOSE are things that make the Word unfruitful.

It is not the sower sowing the Word that is the problem. In fact, Jesus never said that the sower should only focus on good ground, or that he should sow a certain way. But the sower sows the Word to EVERYONE.

Follow-up can help people to avoid the pitfalls that Jesus listed, but ultimately, it's up to them to decide if they want to be good ground, or if they want to allow other things to steal that seed away from them. It's not the evangelist's responsibility, neither is it the responsibility of the "follow-up" people. The sower has one job;

To sow the Word.

​

 

[JimB]

Well, then, do it your way.

I have tried everything to win the lost and the only thing that REALLY works is when people truly become Christ’s witnesses. It’s just easier to let the preacher/evangelist do it but given the right incentive, people really do want to share their faith.

It works for us. The other hasn’t.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[probinson]

The only thing that will ever REALLY work, whether in a "mass-evangelism" setting or one-on-one, is when the Word is sown into good ground.

 

[Eila]

Evangelistic crusades are a sorry excuse for just being Christ’s witnesses.

Someone wondered why it seems easier for us to mount a crusade against littering than to stoop down and pick up a gum wrapper. In the same way, we have this strange idea that it is easier to mount a crusade than simply share God’s love with our neighbors and co-workers.

There will never be a good substitute for doing what we have been left on eartH to do—“BE MY WITNESSES” (Acts 1.8).

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

Not a substitute - an additional method. What are people to do if they have no Christian neighbors or co-workers? Where is their opportunity to hear and respond to the Gospel? Should we limit the methods God can use to just what has worked for us personally?

 

[JimB]

The only thing that will ever REALLY work, whether in a "mass-evangelism" setting or one-on-one, is when the Word is sown into good ground.

This is true, but I believe the Holy Spirit prepares the soil of the heart, fertilizes it (Luke 13.8) and nourishes it as we continue to water seed that is sown. God will give the increase.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[nephilimiyr]

Evangelistic crusades are a sorry excuse for just being Christ’s witnesses.

Someone wondered why it seems easier for us to mount a crusade against littering than to stoop down and pick up a gum wrapper. In the same way, we have this strange idea that it is easier to mount a crusade than simply share God’s love with our neighbors and co-workers.

There will never be a good substitute for doing what we have been left on eartH to do—“BE MY WITNESSES” (Acts 1.8).

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

It seems to me Jim that in your efforts to think outside the box has actually backfired because if what you just said isn't putting yourself inside a box I don't know what is.

Whether it's through a crusade by an evangelist or if it's a one on one discussion between two individuals, it's the power of the Holy Spirit that convicts people and draws them closer to God so who are you to say in what way the Holy Spirit should work? You can argue with people all you want but in the end what I see you doing is telling God how He is suppose to handle His business.

I see no one here saying that it's all up to the evangelistic crusades to win people to Christ and I see no one here argueing with you that witnessing to people one on one isn't a good thing or that it doesn't work or that it may or may not be the best approach. You are the one who wants to limit God in how it's done, you are the one tareing down, no one else is but you. You say there is no substitute but we are saying that there is more than one way to skin a cat. You? you say there is only one way. You only see the Bible allowing for one way so we all must jump in your box with you.

I agree, witnessing to people one on one is the best way to go about telling people about Christ but circumstances have to demand that to happen. What about the 10/40 window and the hundreds of millions of people that will never recieve the Gospel? What about their circumstances or situations? Where are all these people witnessing to them one on one? Yes, in America you can walk down the street and witness to whom ever but you wont get away with it in most of those countries in the 10/40.

Long live mass media!!!

 

[nephilimiyr]

The only thing that will ever REALLY work, whether in a "mass-evangelism" setting or one-on-one, is when the Word is sown into good ground.

Maybe that is just too simple to understand?

 

[JimB]

It seems to me Jim that in your efforts to think outside the box has actually backfired because if what you just said isn't putting yourself inside a box I don't know what is.

Whether it's through a crusade by an evangelist or if it's a one on one discussion between two individuals, it's the power of the Holy Spirit that convicts people and draws them closer to God so who are you to say in what way the Holy Spirit should work? You can argue with people all you want but in the end what I see you doing is telling God how He is suppose to handle His business.

I see no one here saying that it's all up to the evangelistic crusades to win people to Christ and I see no one here argueing with you that witnessing to people one on one isn't a good thing or that it doesn't work or that it may or may not be the best approach. You are the one who wants to limit God in how it's done, you are the one tareing down, no one else is but you. You say there is no substitute but we are saying that there is more than one way to skin a cat. You? you say there is only one way. You only see the Bible allowing for one way so we all must jump in your box with you.

I agree, witnessing to people one on one is the best way to go about telling people about Christ but circumstances have to demand that to happen. What about the 10/40 window and the hundreds of millions of people that will never recieve the Gospel? What about their circumstances or situations? Where are all these people witnessing to them one on one? Yes, in America you can walk down the street and witness to whom ever but you wont get away with it in most of those countries in the 10/40.

Long live mass media!!!

Not “witnessing to” people, Neph—but BEING a witness (Acts 1.8). It is not “one of the best ways” to win the lost—it is THE absolute best way because it is Jesus’ way. Preaching the Gospel is great and everyone of us should bear the Good News that Jesus came into the world to save sinners, but nothing can top being a witness.

I did a poll not too long ago and asked a congregation what brought them to Christ. More than 90% said a respected friend or relative who brought them to church, maybe one (maybe) said they were saved in an evangelistic service (revival/crusade).

I know urging people to become Christ’s living epistles known and read of all men, watering seed wherever they go and being ready at all times to give anyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you is the only thing I would stake the future of the church on. People will be doing that long after our cultural form of organized mass crusades has passed into oblivion.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[JimB]

It seems to me Jim that in your efforts to think outside the box has actually backfired because if what you just said isn't putting yourself inside a box I don't know what is.

*****

Was this a veiled insult?

I may be thinking outside your box, Neph, but I hope I am inside God’s.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[Tamara224]

Was this a veiled insult?

I may be thinking outside your box, Neph, but I hope I am inside God’s.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

I don't think he meant it as an insult, Jim.

But that was a really good answer... (even though I don't agree that you've put yourself in a box with what you've said ).

 

[JimB]

I don't think he meant it as an insult, Jim.

But that was a really good answer... (even though I don't agree that you've put yourself in a box with what you've said ).

I would hope not. It sure didn’t sound like Neph to me.

Anyhow, has anyone heard from Balance since he stepped in it a few posts back?

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[Always in His Presence]

I would hope not. It sure didn’t sound like Neph to me.

Anyhow, has anyone heard from Balance since he stepped in it a few posts back?

***snif*** you do care.

Stepped in it? LOL

 

[Always in His Presence]

Since you seem to have missed my last post - here I'll post it for you again.

Mass evangelism does in fact work.
​

Here is why I say that:

• There is scriptural precedent for it, from Jesus own ministry, who we are to be imitators of to Acts 2, Acts 5:13-15, Acts 8:5:7, Acts 13:44-46, Acts 14:17-19.
• There is historical record of evangelist preaching to entire cities, The Wesley's in the late 1700's would draw crowds of 10,000+ is one example that comes directly to mind.
• In today's society there is obvious and prolific fruit from such ventures. As one individual I can personally name 16 or so people who accepted Christ at a crusade and credit that event for changing their lives.
• Churches that get involved in the crusades (at least from my experience), benefit greatly from them.
  

When we participated in the Billy Graham crusade, we took the instruction and the challenge seriously. We had almost a year to prepare, we went to the training sessions, prayed as a church for the lost, trained and got teams of two to reach those people whose names we were given. It set a fire in the church for the lost.

When we got the names, we went and personally visited every one of them. Some stayed out of church, some came to ours and some, we referred to other churches. Sort of like the parable of the seed.

I've never seen a positive grow from a negative - we don't build by tearing down, just like we don't encourage by being critical.

Does mass evangelism work - definitely yes. Does mass evangelism work 100% - definitely no. It takes every part of the Body of Christ working together to make it complete.

Does Sunday service as evangelism work - definitely yes. Does Sunday service as evangelism work 100% - definitely no. It takes every part of the Body of Christ working together to make it complete.

Does one on one evangelism work - definitely yes. Does one on one evangelism work 100% - definitely no. It takes every part of the Body of Christ working together to make it complete.

Does home group evangelism work - definitely yes. Does home group evangelism work 100% - definitely no. It takes every part of the Body of Christ working together to make it complete.

Does street evangelism work - definitely yes. Does street evangelism work 100% - definitely no. It takes every part of the Body of Christ working together to make it complete.

Remember this post from JeCrois that you said you agreed with?

I can go downtown in a large city and tell every person individually that stops to listen about Jesus until I'm blue in the face, but not all of them are going to take what i say to heart. I could spend months counseling with those who heard me and "converted" but nothing I do will change those who just don't have it in their heart to change. That is the Holy Spirit's job.

We can't bash one method for not yielding adequate numbers in our eyes when every other method used can have the same turn-outs.

Reaching the lost at a big crusade has nothing to do with lack of effort on our part. People can see Jesus in us if they look hard enough, but not everyone has eyes strong enough to see that. For some people it takes the means of a big event with the lights and doodads or whatever because that is all they open their eyes to see. We can show them all the Christianity love that we have to offer, but that is just not enough to spark a desire for that love in some people....different strokes for different folks.

The beauty of God is in the eye of the beholder. Some people come to see that beauty through the efforts of a private conversation with one person. Some people see the beauty in the midst of a crowd of 100,000 other people. There is no difference between the amount of good between the two.

To discredit the good that evangelism brings is wrong. To discredit the bad that it does is also wrong. To say that it is a waste when it only brings in small numbers of conversions is wrong. To say that all the people who were "disillusioned" don't matter in light of the "illusioned" is wrong. But to put it all at the fault of the evangelist who is doing what God called them to do is wrong.To call one method better than another method of reaching the lost when they both do the exact same thing is wrong.
The NT had ways of reaching people through big events. We don't know the true success of what they did in the larger scheme of things because there is no comparison between numbers. (i.e. 'This many' out of 'this many' got the real deal) So we can't say that the motive for today's big events are any different from the motives that Jesus himself had when He spoke to the multitudes or when He spoke to people one-on-one. We should step back and see that any means to see someone saved is a blessing and not a waste.
God calls all of us to spread the Truth in the best way we can. That may be on a one-on-one basis, that may be through leading worship, that may be through serving the community in different charities, or that may be through the intrinsic and careful work that evangelists put up with. God sees our strengths and talents (which He so kindly bestows us with) and calls us to use those things to glorify His name.

 

[JimB]

Since you seem to have missed my last post - here I'll post it for you again.

*****​

Sorry, Balance, but I’m still getting over your Tour Guide to the Bible post to listen to anything else you have to say on this subject.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[Always in His Presence]

Sorry, Balance, but I’m still getting over your Tour Guide to the Bible post to listen to anything else you have to say on this subject.

Are you purposely trying to derail the thread, or just have problems with basic English? - see my post above is the third time I've posted it.

It's the very same subject that you agreed with - see here: Post #115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balance
That my Brothers and Sisters is perhaps one of the most eloquent/civil displays of Godly wisdom I have ever seen on this forum.

I agree.

~Jim

First you agreed with this:

Originally Posted by JeCrois
I can go downtown in a large city and tell every person individually that stops to listen about Jesus until I'm blue in the face, but not all of them are going to take what i say to heart. I could spend months counceling with those who heard me and "converted" but nothing I do will change those who just don't have it in their heart to change. That is the Holy Spirit's job.

We can't bash one method for not yielding adequate numbers in our eyes when every other method used can have the same turn-outs. God calls all of us to spread the Truth in the best way we can. That may be on a one-on-one basis, that may be through leading worship, that may be through serving the community in different charities, or that may be through the intrinsic and careful work that evangelists put up with. God sees our strengths and talents (which He so kindly bestows us with) and calls us to use those things to glorify His name.

Reaching the lost at a big crusade has nothing to do with lack of effort on our part. People can see Jesus in us if they look hard enough, but not everyone has eyes strong enough to see that. For some people it takes the means of a big event with the lights and doodads or whatever because that is all they open their eyes to see. We can show them all the Christianity love that we have to offer, but that is just not enough to spark a desire for that love in some people....different strokes for different folks.

The beauty of God is in the eye of the beholder. Some people come to see that beauty through the efforts of a private conversation with one person. Some people see the beauty in the midst of a crowd of 100,000 other people. There is no difference between the amount of good between the two.

To discredit the good that evangelism brings is wrong. To discredit the bad that it does is also wrong. To say that it is a waste when it only brings in small numbers of conversions is wrong. To say that all the people who were "disillusioned" don't matter in light of the "illusioned" is wrong. But to put it all at the fault of the evangelist who is doing what God called them to do is wrong. To call one method better than another method of reaching the lost when they both do the exact same thing is wrong.

The NT had ways of reaching people through big events. We don't know the true success of what they did in the larger scheme of things because there is no comparison between numbers. (i.e. 'This many' out of 'this many' got the real deal) So we can't say that the motive for today's big events are any different from the motives that Jesus himself had when He spoke to the multitudes or when He spoke to people one-on-one. We should step back and see that any means to see someone saved is a blessing and not a waste.

And now it seems like you've changed your mind?

Why do you no longer agree with Godly wisdom?

 

[probinson]

The only thing that will ever REALLY work, whether in a "mass-evangelism" setting or one-on-one, is when the Word is sown into good ground.

Maybe that is just too simple to understand?

Apparently so.

 

[JeCrois]

It seems to me Jim that in your efforts to think outside the box has actually backfired because if what you just said isn't putting yourself inside a box I don't know what is.

Whether it's through a crusade by an evangelist or if it's a one on one discussion between two individuals, it's the power of the Holy Spirit that convicts people and draws them closer to God so who are you to say in what way the Holy Spirit should work? You can argue with people all you want but in the end what I see you doing is telling God how He is suppose to handle His business.

I see no one here saying that it's all up to the evangelistic crusades to win people to Christ and I see no one here argueing with you that witnessing to people one on one isn't a good thing or that it doesn't work or that it may or may not be the best approach. You are the one who wants to limit God in how it's done, you are the one tareing down, no one else is but you. You say there is no substitute but we are saying that there is more than one way to skin a cat. You? you say there is only one way. You only see the Bible allowing for one way so we all must jump in your box with you.

I agree, witnessing to people one on one is the best way to go about telling people about Christ but circumstances have to demand that to happen. What about the 10/40 window and the hundreds of millions of people that will never recieve the Gospel? What about their circumstances or situations? Where are all these people witnessing to them one on one? Yes, in America you can walk down the street and witness to whom ever but you wont get away with it in most of those countries in the 10/40.

Long live mass media!!!

[EDIT: To Jim] Can you honestly deny that you are in fact doing this. This may not be your intent, but to a lot of people this is how you are coming across. This is what it sounds like you're saying:

"My way, is the only way there is because that is how I interpet the Bible. I have this certain belief and I refuse to see to reason and that any other way the Bible may be interpreted is wrong. No matter what anyone else may say, I think I am right. I will call everyone else who is successful with mass evangelism bogus because my personal experience says otherwise, regardless of their experience."

I really don't think this is what you are thinking. I value your opinion very much. So much that I can step back and see where you are coming from and see your legitimate understanding. But from what you are posting, I just can't see that you are doing the same...

Not “witnessing to” people, Neph—but BEING a witness (Acts 1.8). It is not “one of the best ways” to win the lost—it is THE absolute best way because it is Jesus’ way. Preaching the Gospel is great and everyone of us should bear the Good News that Jesus came into the world to save sinners, but nothing can top being a witness.

I did a poll not too long ago and asked a congregation what brought them to Christ. More than 90% said a respected friend or relative who brought them to church, maybe one (maybe) said they were saved in an evangelistic service (revival/crusade).

I know urging people to become Christ’s living epistles known and read of all men, watering seed wherever they go and being ready at all times to give anyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you is the only thing I would stake the future of the church on. People will be doing that long after our cultural form of organized mass crusades has passed into oblivion.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

I wonder if you poll those same people asking whether or not they supported mass evangelism, that they might say "Hey, if it works for someone else, why not? Glory to God."...just a thought...

Evangelistic crusades are a sorry excuse for just being Christ’s witnesses.

Someone wondered why it seems easier for us to mount a crusade against littering than to stoop down and pick up a gum wrapper. In the same way, we have this strange idea that it is easier to mount a crusade than simply share God’s love with our neighbors and co-workers.

There will never be a good substitute for doing what we have been left on eartH to do—“BE MY WITNESSES” (Acts 1.8).

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

Who's to say that the people running the crusades aren't being Christ's witnesses. They are witnessing in a different way, but not in a way that is unbiblical.

 

[JimB]

****


Why do you no longer agree with Godly wisdom?

Godly wisdom ... like from a tour guide?

This thread is now dead as far as the OP is concerned. I want people to show me what they believe from scripture not from information given to them by a prefessional tour guide. This subject is more important to me than that. If you can prove me wrong from scripture I stand corrected but I am really don't want to waste my time otherwise.

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

 

[nephilimiyr]

I would hope not. It sure didn’t sound like Neph to me.

Anyhow, has anyone heard from Balance since he stepped in it a few posts back?

~Jim

Why do we prefer problems that are familiar to solutions that are not?​

The way this thread has gone I wouldn't blame you for thinking that I was trying to insult you, but no, that wasn't what I was trying to do. If I want to insult anyone on this board I wouldn't have to try. Insulting others is far too easy.

As I said, "it seems to me", it is an honest observation of mine and it still seems to me that you are wanting to box us in on how we all should be witnesses and or how evangelism should be.

I do understand 100% what you are saying about being a witness; letting our lights shine and being the salt of the earth. I have written about this in CF quite often because, like you I suppose, feel as though this part of evangelism isn't being put into practised enough. However, it does seem as though you have totally written off the evangelistic crusades and I just simply believe that that is wrong and or not the right approach to take. I'm sure some crusades need to do it better and they have room to improve on what they're doing but the important thing is that they need to improve on it, not do away with it. Again, I'm not quite sure if that is what you're saying but it does seem as though that is what you are saying. I really would like to know exactly what you are saying about what should be done with these crusades but I would not agree with you if you say that they are doing no good and that we need to end them. Improve, yes; end the practise, no.

And above all, we are the salt of the earth and if we have lost our flavor then it's time to put the flavor back into the world, amen? We should all be praying that God helps us to crucify ourselves, our flesh, so that when people see us, they don't see us but the Christ that is within us, Christ in us is the hope of glory. It's not us nor is it about us but it is about the Spirit of Christ living in us. He brings hope to a hopeless generation and if we don't start doing things differently than what we have been as a Church concerning evangelism then we are going to lose this generation to the devil. We all have to do our part! Amen?