Which of the 4 Gospels is best to introduce to a non-Christian?

[haya]

I'm not sure if this is the "right" forum to post this question, but I looked around at other forums and didn't see a more fitting place.

Here's my question:
I'm hoping (praying!!) to start a Bible study with a non-Christian coworker. Just a one-on-one inductive manuscript study. Since she has no knowledge of Scripture, I figured that one of the Gospels would be the best place to start.

But I've heard it said that a certain Gospel might be better to introduce to non-Christians than another certain Gospel. For example, if I recall correctly, the Gospel of Matthew shouldn't be used with Muslims as an introduction to the Bible because they heartily disagree with the geneology of Jesus, or the man-God concept, and so it would start things off on the wrong foot; better to take a look at the Gospel of Mark instead, for example. This particular coworker isn't Muslim (although I do have another coworker who is, and I'd like info, but that's for a different post!). But you get the idea.

So.. does anybody have expertise in the area of evangelism or introducing the Bible to non-Christians? Thanks!

 

[JMRE5150]

The Gospel of John seems to be the default choice for spreading God's word to non-Christians.


In fact, more "mini-bibles" are made (they are about 2 1/2 inches tall by 1 1/2 inches wide) about the Gospel of John than any other gospel. Its the favorite choice that christians use to witness...

That, in my opinion, would be what I would choose.

Robb

 

[muffler dragon]

To me, it really depends on the person.

Luke is the most detailed, and thus, beneficial for the Type A crowd.
John is great, because it paints Christ in such a Deity sense.
Matthew is great for someone involved with the Old Testament.
Mark is the quick hit. Someone who wants the slam-bam-thank you-man in a two part sitting.

Take your pick.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Mark...
It is short, to the point, and very full of action.

 

[Biarien]

I believe Mark is also chronological, whereas the others are not. Muffler dragon put it well (albeit simply).

 

[nwmsugrad]

The book of John was written for evangelistic purposes while the other Gosples were written to believers.

John 20:30-31 (KJV)

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

 

[Biarien]

That's not really true...

All the Gospels were written for evangelistic purposes (among other purposes). John simply states it.

 

[Under_His_Shadow]

Actually the "Gospel" is more clearly and thoroughly taught in Paul's epistles than it is in either the 3 Synoptic Gospels, or in John, but since you're asking about them, most scholars seem to suggest studying John first. If I remember correctly, R.C. Sproul suggests teaching new believers the book of Mark first, and then jumping next to either Genesis or Exodus, and then to Psalms, etc. He also says, if limited to reading only one book of the Bible, his choice would be Hebrews, but regarding that, keep in mind that he's a bible scholar and theologian (who happens to be a "Calvinist").

 

[C.A.B.L]

I would have to agree that Paul's epistles do give the best explanation of the Gospels for a non-Christian. But for foundational witnessing I would have to agree that John is the best. It proves Jesus Deity right off the bat and doesn't lead up to it, goes in depth to why Jesus had to die, and what you have to do now that you are a Christian. So I would have to recommend that one myself.

 

[eutychus]

Though many promote John as being used to evangelize, I'd go with Mark. I believe that while John is steeped in Christology, Mark does a splendid job of explaining God's power found in Jesus. Not only is it shorter, but it's less-wordy, action-packed, and the end of the book is quick and to the point. Jesus is resurrected, and then he tells his disciples to go preach his name (a great, quick transition into direct witnessing if the opportunity hadn't been given before throughout the Bible study).

 

[phylaax]

I wouldn't use any particular gospel, just tell your friend what each of them do, the differences between them (and why we would have reason to be concerned if there were NO difference at all cuz they were eye-witness accounts), and the story they all convey. Pick one to use mainly depending on what kinda person they are, though.

 

[Acolyte]

If you want to evangilize I believe it is neccesary to present to whole of all of the gospels to an un-believer. To completley give him/her the full picture you must present them with the full story. There are certain aspects of Christianity that are explained in 1 gospel but not the next. So in short, all of them are the best and none of them are least.