Does mass evangelism really work?

[dawnsday]

But don't these things happen at evangelistic events today? Tons and tons of evangelists do this every day in other countries...and in our country.

I was specifying the big flamboyant american ones...i don't know what they do in other countries, really, but my first thought when i think evangelical is Tammy Faye

 

[JeCrois]

I'm not saying that every evangelist goes out and feeds the hungry, clothes the poor, and do other openly charitable things, especially the American ones. But they are doing what God is calling them to do by reaching out to as many people as they can in the best way that they can.

How is that different from what God called the people mentioned in the NT to do?

I just don't see how we can call evangelism a big waste of time and money if they are following God's call on their life...and succeeding (in whatever small numbers that may be).

 

[Eila]

Interesting thread....

Many of what is termed "evangelism" today is not true evangelism.

When is it ever wrong to preach the Gospel to few or to a multitude?

There are billions in this world who have never heard the name of Jesus once. Americans spend more on golf balls and dog food than they do on missions. Where is the money being wasted? On golf or on people going into all the world preaching the Gospel?

Is follow-up a concern - there is a harvest waiting. Workers are needed. If follow-up is on your heart I'm sure you will find plenty of opportunities to do it.

Disillusionment is diminished when you demonstrate the living Christ. Miracles accompany preaching of the Gospel for a reason.

 

[Eila]

I am no longer infatuated with mass evangelism, having been involved in a dozen of them, including four Billy Graham Crusades. I have really tried to take n honest look at it, hear those who have been involved in them (and a few who have either been disillusioned or burned-out by them) and have come to the conclusion that mass evangelism is one of the least productive means of winning (and keeping) the lost.

And I repeat …

There is a better way. The NT way. And that does not include mass crusades.

~Jim

People with nothing to hide hide nothing.​

Mass crusades may not be the most effective way to evangelize in the Western world, but not all the world is Western. It would take forever to bring the Gospel to the third world countries with one-on-one evangelism. Already with mass crusades not much progress is being made with the population rate. I know there are many people ready and willing to go, but the ideas of "one-on-one evangelism/cell group evangelism" only has diminished funding for efforts in third world countries.

 

[Eila]

Here are some interesting statistics:

Global Church Member Finance in US Dollars:
12,300 Billion (12.3 Trillion) - Total Annual Income
213 Billion - Given to Christian Causes (1.73% of total income)
11.4 Billion - Given to Foreign Missions (5.4% of Giving to Christian causes)

Of Foreign Mission Giving:
87% goes for work among those already Christian,
12% goes for work among already evangelized non-Christians, and
1% or $114 million goes for work among people groups in the Unevangelized or Unreached category.


Of the 12,300 Billion given by church attendees only $114 million goes to the unreached. Perhaps that is where the problem lies. Most evangelism dollars go toward people who have already heard the Gospel and rejected it or toward people who are already Christians.

1/3 of the world is unreached.

Joshua Product reports:

​

Unreached
Status data unavailable. Located where the gospel is not generally available. - 5.4 million people

Unreached
Very few, if any, known believers. .
980 million people

Unreached
Evangelicals >0.01%, but <=2%.
1.6 billion people.

Christians typically live around other Christians. One-on-one evangelism will not work when you have 0.01% or less of the population as Christians.

Stats taken from: http://www.missionfrontiers.org/newslinks/statewe.htm
http://www.joshuaproject.net/globalscale.php

 

[dawnsday]

I'm not saying that every evangelist goes out and feeds the hungry, clothes the poor, and do other openly charitable things, especially the American ones. But they are doing what God is calling them to do by reaching out to as many people as they can in the best way that they can.

How is that different from what God called the people mentioned in the NT to do?

I just don't see how we can call evangelism a big waste of time and money if they are following God's call on their life...and succeeding (in whatever small numbers that may be).

it isn't always i am sure, but i see them drive about in their shiney cars and think a lot of it is deceptive.

false prophets you know?

 

[NewSong]

If it were not for mass evangelism, I would not have a pastor who was converted. I also would not have a sister-in-law who has converted either. I have heard the argument from some who believe that if their salvation issues were not addressed in the mass evangelism then they would have been some other time. Well phooey, I believe when my sister-in-law and my pastor stated that when they seen all the others go up to the place to show where they were making a decision that it helped them decide then there is a good reason to have mass evangelisms. One of my friend's husband was saved in mass evangelism. This old guy in our church was saved in mass evangelism and just since he was saved 10 years ago, he has lost his wife, 2 daughters 1 son, 1 brother, 1 son-in-law...Thank God for God in this man's life. He is living the life of Job right now and is faithful to GOD and I praise God everytime I look into that man's eyes and see Jesus in him that he was converted in mass evangelism. I sort of resented his intrusion at first because I enjoyed the services. He was unchurch, unlearned and ignorant. He just knew he needed Jesus. He walked up right in the middle of this formal evangistic service and said, "I want Jesus." I wonder what the speaker was going to do. He stopped everything and prayed with him privately and a pastor stepped up tot he pulpit asked us to pray too. I will never forget this man and his innocence and desire. He really didn't know what it was like to be in church or a church service. Thank God for mass evangelism.

I know it is a terrible mess for any pastor after the evangelist has left but I can't help but thank God for the mass evangelism that does take place.

 

[JimB]

I rejoice that your pastor and friends came to the Lord in a big crusade and no one has ever denied that such conversions occur. I have prayed with some as a counselor in a crusade who have and I rejoice that the Lord reached them there. But to say &#8220;phooey&#8221; to the fact that the Lord could/would have reached them at another time and place is a tad presumptuous. ​

Crusades are &#8220;needed&#8221; because believers are not being the witnesses that we were left here to be. Surely your pastor, before he was saved, met many believers who crossed his path every day. Apparently, they were not salt and light to him nor did they plant and water seed. They may have shown him the ugly underside of some Christian&#8217;s lives that repulsed him. But finally God reached him, despite our failures, in another way.

I am sure (through 40 years of personal involvement in this things) that for every one like your pastor who walked away from the crusade with the real goods, there were ten others who thought they did but who responded for other reasons than faith&#8212;i.e., to pacify feelings of guilt, because the evangelist&#8217;s story piqued their emotions or the invitational song was moving, or because ..... (name a hundred other reasons). They probably left the crusade with a bundle of literature under their arms, led to believe they were &#8220;saved&#8221;, with high hope that they were going to finally get their life in order, and with a hope destined to be dashed. They may have even shown up at a church a time or two, but because they had no personal connection with the church (like a Christian friend); not an assigned official crusade follow-up team member, but a friend, who would check on him daily and pick him up and bring him to church instead of just sending him church literature, he drifted back into his unbelief, now with the added frustration that he had "tried" Christianity and found it wanting. The seed had fallen on shallow ground and the birds have plucked it up.

My guess is that your pastor had a Christian friend who had personally invited him to the big crusade (which is the case in probably 99% of the nonbelievers who actually attend a crusade or concert), maybe even went by and picked him up, sat with him and so watered the seed&#8212;fact is, few nonbelievers show up at evangelistic crusades or Christian concerts without some Christian inviting/bringing them. My question is, do we need these highly visible, extremely costly, sometimes (often) counterproductive big events to do this? Could your pastor's Christian friend have been salt and light without the big evangelistic show? Better question: Does God need mass events, smoke and mirrors, big name athletes and glitzy recording artists, slick programs and talented speakers to win the lost? Even better question: Does God have a better way of doing evangelism?​

Yep. The New Testament way&#8212;the one-on-one, salt-and-light way where we &#8220;be&#8221; His witnesses (Acts 1.8), not go out and &#8220;do&#8221; witnessing (like planning and promoting big evangelistic events or door-to-door gospel blitz teams).

​

If mass evangelism is necessary (which it is not, IMO) it is only because we are failing to do evangelism God&#8217;s way, the salt-and-light way. Christians, amazingly, seem to find it easier to spend six months or a year planning and promoting some big extravagant gospel show, hiring an expensive crusade team, buying ads and flyers, hawking the event like some country & western concert, renting the coliseum, rallying the churches, training the counselors and follow-up committee &#8230; etc.etc.etc. rather than just being salt and light and watering the seed that someone has already planted in your neighbors life. Prebelievers don&#8217;t want to hear the Gospel; they want to see it working in your life.

But, I guess it&#8217;s easier to just plan a big crusade. ​

~Jim

I don't want to get to the end of my life and find​

that I lived just the length of it. I want to have lived

the width of it as well.


​

 

[NewSong]

I agree we need to be better witnesses. I know I can say that because I desire to be a better witness. I know what happens even with my lousy witness that folks are coming to the Lord on a regular basis and so I do agree that evangelism is an every day occurence and is done individually. I had a great dad whose example was very much evangelistic and I wanted to be just like him winning souls for Jesus. (I didn't always want to be like him until I understood what he was about). Anyway, I agree that we as a church do fall short in inviting people to Jesus and introducing them our Savior.

You are also right that some people came along right in the middle of my pastor' and his wife's most critical time in their lives. They were in the middle of a divorce and someone took time to invite them to a Billy Graham Crusade. My pastor went because Johnny Cash was giving his testimony. My pastor's wife went because she was talked into going. The two of them heard the testimony and heard the crusade and that was it for them. Radically coverted and radically saved. They didn't even know the people that invited them. Fortunately it stopped the divorce and stopped their life of the downward spiral and they were turned to the Lord. Yes they had met Christians before and as you said they were not inspired by their examples. They didn't even know where to attend church after the crusade. Thankfully the Billy Graham crusades have a great follow-up and someone done their job and followed them up. Actually my pastor was featured in Decision magazine here a few years ago.

I guess though, what I am trying to say is that if we were all doing our jobs, no we would not need mass evangelism but some of us are not living to our full potential to be the salt of the earth instead we are so busy following doctrines, dotting the i's and crossing the t's and with agenda's.

When I was in highschool, I probably had an average of 4 kids going to church in a month's time. I stopped here not to long ago an took a look at what the difference was and it was the zeal of God that had consumed me when I was a youth was so different now. I asked God for that zeal again to invite others and my goodness, I have had so many opportunites and times I have had opportunity to invite. Not everyone comes to the Lord when I have the opportunity but the seed has been planted, or watered.

I personally would like to see more people out there living their lives for Jesus and the attraction to be there instead of going around and acting holier than Thou.

Yes I cited just a few examples but there were so many more. My cousin that died the other day was converted through a Billy Graham evangelistic crusade. I am passionate about evangelism and so I am for anything that works to bring souls to the Lord.

I know your are saying we need to do our jobs better and I do not dispute that at all. I admit I need to do a better job listening to the Lord and living for the Lord in everything I say and do.

Having said that, I need to get to my family reunion.

 

[JimB]

There is an easier, biblical, more natural way to win the world to Christ—JUST BE A CHRISTIAN!! Let your light shine and savor/salt the world around you. We are living epistles “known and read by all men”. People are reading our lives and what they read should attract thdm, not repulse the, from Christ. Your best witness is not what you say but who you are, not what you profess but what you possess, not doing witnessing but being a witness (Acts 1.8).

"Preach the gospel. And if necessary, use words." ~St. Francis​

Maybe, like most things we label Christian, we stumble over it because it is too simple.

If we truly live the Christian life, even if we never say a word or hand out a gospel tract, God will use it to win the world. If we are always there for people who don’t know Christ, to visit them in the hospital, visit their children in jail, help them move to a new home, baby-sit their children, invite them for a meal, love them and respect them, Christianity will attract them whether we ever preach to them or not. Then, someday, as often happened in the NT, because we have "watered seed", they will say to us, “What must I do to be saved?” and then we can give those who “ask us a reason for the hope that is in us” (1 Peter 3.15).

And we never have to spend a year planning and pumping up a mass crusade.

~Jim

I am master of my unspoken words.​

 

[merryheart]

My church is doing something we call "Saved to Serve" The Saved to Serve folks gather on one saturday per month and cook a couple hundred hamburgers, and then go door to door and hand them out and ask people if we can pray with them over anything. We tell them where we are from and why we are doing it, but do not twist their arms for coming to our church or anything else. We have seen several people pray to receive Christ, a little boy be healed of leukemia, two women miraculously get jobs, a healing of ovarian cancer, repair of a mother\son relationship, a drug abusing pregnant teenager stopped using drugs, gave her life to Christ and gave birth to a healthy baby, and much more. We are handing out the burgers in a poor area that is in the neighborhood where our congregation gathers. Our mission is simply to serve with no agenda, and asking nothing in return. God is really using this.

 

[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 yeilding 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 Christianly 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.

 

[JimB]

My church is doing something we call "Saved to Serve" The Saved to Serve folks gather on one saturday per month and cook a couple hundred hamburgers, and then go door to door and hand them out and ask people if we can pray with them over anything. We tell them where we are from and why we are doing it, but do not twist their arms for coming to our church or anything else. We have seen several people pray to receive Christ, a little boy be healed of leukemia, two women miraculously get jobs, a healing of ovarian cancer, repair of a mother\son relationship, a drug abusing pregnant teenager stopped using drugs, gave her life to Christ and gave birth to a healthy baby, and much more. We are handing out the burgers in a poor area that is in the neighborhood where our congregation gathers. Our mission is simply to serve with no agenda, and asking nothing in return. God is really using this.

I am discovering that low-key, non-confrontational, servant evangelism where we allow the Spirit to draw people to Christ because we are His salt and light is far more effective than head-on collisions with non-believers and far less damaging to them in the long run. We just need to be Christians and follow the leading of the Spirit, not requiring Him to follow our lead as we charge out into the field with our machetes and scythes, ripping up tares and wheat. When a soul is ready to &#8220;reap&#8221; we just need to be there to give them a reason for the hope that is in us.

This method of evangelism is NT Evangelism and requires far less energy, human ingenuity and money and produces far more results and much less collateral damage than our well-intentioned but poorly-executed efforts to do the Spirit&#8217;s job for Him.

~Jim

 

[Always in His Presence]

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.

That my Brothers and Sisters is perhaps one of the most eloquent/civil displays of Godly wisdom I have ever seen on this forum.

 

[JimB]

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

​

​

​

I am master of my unspoken words.​

 

[geetrue]

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 have noticed this before in other post he has made ... this young man is going to go far.

He's even humble ... we could all learn from him.

JeCrois is only 18 people ... keep your eyes on this one ...

 

[Eila]

I am discovering that low-key, non-confrontational, servant evangelism where we allow the Spirit to draw people to Christ because we are His salt and light is far more effective than head-on collisions with non-believers and far less damaging to them in the long run. We just need to be Christians and follow the leading of the Spirit, not requiring Him to follow our lead as we charge out into the field with our machetes and scythes, ripping up tares and wheat. When a soul is ready to “reap” we just need to be there to give them a reason for the hope that is in us.

How is this effective when most of the population is not Christian, does not know any Christians, and may not have even heard of Jesus?

There is an easier, biblical, more natural way to win the world to Christ—JUST BE A CHRISTIAN!! Let your light shine and savor/salt the world around you.

This may be effective when the "world around you" is Christianized, but how can you be a light and salt to the billions of people in the third world who do not have the advantage of a Christian neighbor.

If we truly live the Christian life, even if we never say a word or hand out a gospel tract, God will use it to win the world. If we are always there for people who don’t know Christ, to visit them in the hospital, visit their children in jail, help them move to a new home, baby-sit their children, invite them for a meal, love them and respect them, Christianity will attract them whether we ever preach to them or not. Then, someday, as often happened in the NT, because we have "watered seed", they will say to us, “What must I do to be saved?” and then we can give those who “ask us a reason for the hope that is in us” (1 Peter 3.15).

This would only work for the part of the world that has the advantage of being around Christians for a long period of time to see their salt and light.

Jim, I understand your concerns, but I think you are Westernizing the problem. What works in the Western world may not be the most effective witness in the rest of the world. It would be great if there were a significant percentage of Christians in all areas of the world to be salt and light - but they are not. Paul didn't go into new areas and just be a salt and light as he built tents. He preached the Gospel.

Mass evangelism may not be the most effective way to reach Dallas, but it may be the most effective way to reach a city in India. Follow-up is not neglected. Many people who do large crusades in new areas build up a church and support a pastor for a year to help them get established.

Many crusades are not really evangelistic crusades, but glorified church meetings. But true mass evangelistic outreaches among those who do not know the Gospel are never without need.

I actually see this idea as harming true evangelistic outreach among the unreached in the third world. I know some have cut off funding for reaching the unreached because they are now "salt and light/cell group only" focused. Just look at the stats I posted previously. How much of what is actually given goes to reaching the unreached? 0.05% if my figures are right. What is wrong with that number?

Are Christians spending too much - is that the problem? What should they be spending it on instead?

 

[JimfromOhio]

To me.... they were "planted" rather than "convicted" to believe. Many of them became believers later down the road by the Holy Spirit.

 

[JimB]

How is this effective when most of the population is not Christian, does not know any Christians, and may not have even heard of Jesus?




This may be effective when the "world around you" is Christianized, but how can you be a light and salt to the billions of people in the third world who do not have the advantage of a Christian neighbor.



This would only work for the part of the world that has the advantage of being around Christians for a long period of time to see their salt and light.

Jim, I understand your concerns, but I think you are Westernizing the problem. What works in the Western world may not be the most effective witness in the rest of the world. It would be great if there were a significant percentage of Christians in all areas of the world to be salt and light - but they are not. Paul didn't go into new areas and just be a salt and light as he built tents. He preached the Gospel.

Mass evangelism may not be the most effective way to reach Dallas, but it may be the most effective way to reach a city in India. Follow-up is not neglected. Many people who do large crusades in new areas build up a church and support a pastor for a year to help them get established.

Many crusades are not really evangelistic crusades, but glorified church meetings. But true mass evangelistic outreaches among those who do not know the Gospel are never without need.

I actually see this idea as harming true evangelistic outreach among the unreached in the third world. I know some have cut off funding for reaching the unreached because they are now "salt and light/cell group only" focused. Just look at the stats I posted previously. How much of what is actually given goes to reaching the unreached? 0.05% if my figures are right. What is wrong with that number?

Are Christians spending too much - is that the problem? What should they be spending it on instead?

You are so right, I am talking about Western-cultural application of Christianity and I know things work differently in the Third World. But I still think, if the NT is any pattern, that one-on-one evangelism&#8212;the kind we seem most reluctant to do&#8212;is still the most effective, no matter what culture.

~Jim

I am master of my unspoken words.​

 

[Eila]

You are so right, I am talking about Western-cultural application of Christianity and I know things work differently in the Third World. But I still think, if the NT is any pattern, that one-on-one evangelism—the kind we seem most reluctant to do—is still the most effective, no matter what culture.

~Jim

I am master of my unspoken words.​

Yes, for the general person in the Western church I agree with you. But ministers can be more effective in one mass meeting (even in the US) than they can in one-on-one contact for a whole year.

I just wish that those who are "one-one-one" only minded would not neglect the overwhelming need in the third world. Funding has been cut due to this change in people's ideas.