(sola)s Hattiesburg Promo Video
(sola)s Hattiesburg from (sola)s on Vimeo.
I love my brother Andy. And I love the things that God is doing with him down in Hattiesburg, MS as a college minister. This is a recent promo video that describes Andy’s ministry and what’s going on. (Take time to notice the nifty posters in the background. I helped design them).
Related Posts:
No commentsSmall Group Curriculum Review – Lifeway’s Platform Series – Stand Against the Wind by Erwin McManus
As a discipleship pastor at a church that is driven by small groups, I’m constantly on the lookout for good, new curriculum, and especially of the video-driven variety (because they seem to work really well in our situation). So, I excitedly picked up the new Stand Against the Wind curriculum by Erwin McManus which was developed by Lifeway. Here are my thoughts…
Packaging
Despite the image on the front cover, which is a bit cheesy, the material came in a self-contained, durable, and unique case. It felt up to date. I was drawn to it. It’s a well executed design from the outside looking in. It contains one leader / participant book and one dvd (containing six messages), all for $25. Perfect! Relevant-feeling. Affordable.
Video
It’s a dvd, not a blueray, but the quality was lower than I expected. The lighting on Erwin (from Mosaic church services) was adequate, but somehow not appealing to the eye on the video. The video appeared grainy. The dvd menu screen was created in such a way that it didn’t seem to fit on my tv screen well. It was almost like I had an overscan issue, but I don’t. The menu designer failed to leave enough space between the content on the menu and the edge of the screen of the tv. Overall it does work, you can read the words on the menu screen, but it feels cheap rather than well executed.
Content
The curriculum is marketed as a composition of six, 20 minute video talks. But to be honest, most of them were more like 10 minute talks. This is not a deal breaker if the content is laid out well, but it’s not. A concise video portion could be advantageous for your small group if it leaves more time for discussion, but I wouldn’t call the Stand Against the Wind videos concise. They were more like endless meanderings. They leave the viewer wondering what the heck Erwin is exactly talking about, and how he got that content from the Scripture passages that he’s reading. And I’m not sure this is completely Erwin’s fault either, Lifeway (or someone) seems to have cut out portions of the sermons (that I guess they deemed unimportant – I’m honestly not sure why there are breaks in the video), that leave a dizzying effect in the overall structure of the message. And, this isn’t really six different sermons, it’s three sermons chopped in half (and really chopped in even more pieces apparently because there are all these breaks in the video).
Having watched all the video portions of this curriculum, I’m still not completely sure what the study is about. I know it’s about living a different sort of life, a life out of step with how the average person in our culture lives, but that wasn’t made very clear on the front end. In fact there is no introduction on the video about the content of the curriculum. The participant book sets up the content a little bit, but overall it’s still confusing.
Erwin’s a great communicator. In fact he’s an unbelievable communicator, but this fact is clouded by the structure of the curriculum.
Participant Book
Good size. Laid out well. Good questions considering the video. They’re probing questions, but because they follow the video, and the video is kind of weak, the questions are kind of weak too. In my opinion the participant book is weakened by the content of the curriculum itself. But this is not the question writer’s fault per se.
Gospel
Suffice it to say, that one could go through this curriculum and have never heard a clear gospel explanation. They would know some things about how God wanted them to live, but I’m not sure they would understand that this sort of living is grounded completely in the cross of Jesus and empowered only by Holy Spirit. Is this an intentional oversight? I don’t think so. Jesus is not ignored to be sure, but I’m not sure he’s lifted up the way he should be in a curriculum that is supposed to be talking about “standing against the wind” and living a life out-of-step with typical America. Any small group leader could supplement the material with some additional gospel truth, but it’s not clearly included in the curriculum itself.
Overall
Love the price. Love the packaging (minus the cheesy, motivation poster image on the front). However, the quality of the video on the dvd and the menu screen execution makes this feel cheap. The content, whether Erwin’s fault or Lifeway’s (I’m not sure), is confusing. The overall message of the curriculum is clouded. The gospel is ignored a little bit (this feels more like a motivational talk than true Christianity). Erwin is engaging, as always, but the choppiness of the messages because of how the video is split up, makes him less engaging than he would be otherwise. Worthwhile for your small group? Probably not. You might have some pretty good discussion from this curriculum, but I’m not sure it would clearly point you towards Jesus. Memorable? I really kind of doubt that it would be. I can picture most people finishing this study and not really understanding what they just studied for six weeks. The Platform series by Lifeway – of which Stand Against the Wind is a part – is certainly promising, but it needs some work before it’s worth the consideration of your small group or small group ministry.
Related Posts:
No commentsLoving thinking-about-God more than God / Loving worshipping-God more than God
This is a good word from Piper about replacing God with aspects of religion. It seems like it’s right, but it’s really pride. I’m definitely prone to fall into this sin. Check it out!?
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: The Prodigal God by Tim Keller
Three Down
The Prodigal God marks the third Tim Keller book that I’ve read this year. All three books (The Reason for God, Counterfeit Gods, and now The Prodigal God) were gifts from my brother Andy and his family. They’re all worth your time.
A Revealing Twist on a Old Favorite
Tim Keller has an uncanny ability to take Bible stories that you’ve heard many, many times before and reveal their relevance in previously unthought of ways. The Prodigal God is a striking example. The entire book explores the parable of “the prodigal son,” or as Keller likes to call it, “the parable of the two lost sons.” As Keller’s renaming of the parable might suggest, he finds as much meaning and significance in the story about the older brother as he does in the story about the younger brother.
The title, “The Prodigal God” is also a bit of a twist on the normal understanding of this parable. The word “prodigal,” according to Keller, means “recklessly extravagant,” or “having spent everything” (1). And he aptly applies this title to God, who recklessly loves His people and who spent the life of His son for our redemption. Keller claims that he has “seen more people encouraged, enlightened, and helped by this passage, when he explained the true meaning of it, than by any other text” (XIII).
I don’t think Keller is stretching the meaning of this story. I think He’s right, and it’s amazing to see all the applications that this story entails.
Personally Speaking
For me personally, I can identify with “the older brother” in this parable. I know my standing before God is one based on Jesus’ performance and not my own performance. But sometimes, in the midst of life, I find myself believing that my performance is the ground upon which God is either proud or disappointed. Sometimes in these moments, especially when I think I am excelling in my pursuit of God, I am the most judgmental person you’d ever want to meet. I start expecting people to live up to my standards. This is pride, and it’s older brother syndrome. The Prodigal God, and about ten other things in my life right now, have helped remind me that I have plenty of faults, and I need to be humble. After all, when I am humble, I am most useful to God.
This is a good book. Easy to read. Life-changing. I wish it weren’t twenty bucks, because I’d buy about fifty copies and give them away.
Related Posts:
No commentsBrief Book Review/Rant: The Revolution by Ron Paul
Between Now and Eternity
Let me start out by saying that the ultimate hope for any government is only Jesus. On this side of eternity, every political theory is lacking. The only perfect government will be the future one, where Jesus is king and the heart of every individual has been made perfect. Until that glorious kingdom is fully made known, every government will be less-than-perfect. Political party affiliation, political candidates, and political ideas will all be found lacking. So I don’t put an exorbitant amount of hope or time into politics. However, I do think we are called as Christians to live out the implications of the gospel to the various cultures that we find ourselves in, and this includes the political culture within America. Between now and eternity, I want to recommend the ideas of Ron Paul as a good solution to a lot of America’s problems.
A.S.A.P.
To be perfectly honest with you, to fully review this book would be a waste of your time and mine. To fully say all that I wish to say about the book, would be to quote the whole book. Rather than writing a lengthy review, I would rather you just read The Revolution. In fact, if you want to stop reading this review right now (which honestly is not much of a review anyway), and instead go read Ron Paul, I would applaud you. There is no portion of The Revolution that I wish to synopsize. I like every word. There is no part I disagree with. It’s all good.
The two political parties, as they currently exist, both promote a future for America that is heading towards total and complete futility. Ron Paul offers an alternative path. Bush was an awful president. Obama seems no better. Does either one intend to lead America into futility? No. But the politics they promote are like a heavy weight tied around the ankle of this country. The nation is drowning. These days America is not the America that we wish it to be. It is not the America that the founding fathers wished it to be. And personally speaking, I like the America that they envisioned better than they one we currently have. So I’m recommending this book.
Simply put, and I know this sounds awfully dogmatic, I dare you to read this book and consider its ideas honestly. Maybe you’ll disagree with some of them, but I think you’ll agree with a lot of them. And that at least will be a step in the right direction.
P.S.
This is an awfully good audiobook (concise, about 5.5 hrs), that’s how I read it. But, I’m thinking of buying a physical copy so I can go back and underline some stuff (see previous post).
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Religion Saves + Nine Other Misconceptions by Mark Driscoll
The Book
My beautiful wife gave me this book for Christmas, and ever since I’ve been slowly picking my way through it’s pages. It’s that type of book. You can read a chapter one night, put the book down, pick it up again a month later, and read another chapter. The chapters stand on their own.
Religion Saves was a sermon series at Mars Hill Church before it became a book. Driscoll gave his church members (and really anyone who visited the church website) the chance to vote on his sermon topics. The nine most popular questions, as determined by the online voting, were developed into the Religion Saves sermon series. The book came about after the fact.
The questions preached / written upon were:
9. Birth Control: There’s no doubt the Bible says children are a blessing, but the Bible doesn’t seem to address the specific topic of birth control. Is this a black-and-white topic, or does if all under liberties?
8. Humor: Why do you make jokes in sermons about Mormon missionaries, homosexuals, trench coat wearers, single men, vegans, and emo kids, and then expect these groups to come to know God through those sermons?
7. Predestination: Why does an all-loving, all-knowing, and all-sovereign God will into creation people he foreknows will suffer eternal condemnation – and the Romans 9:20 answer seems like a cop-out!
6. Grace: Of all the things you teach, what parts of Christianity do you still wrestle with? What’s hardest for you to believe?
5. Sexual Sin: How should Christian men and women go about breaking free form the bondage of sexual sin?
4. Faith and Works: If salvation is by faith alone, then why are so many verses that say or imply the opposite – that salvation is by works?
3. Dating: How does a Christian date righteously, and what are the physical, emotional, and mentally connecting boundaries a Christian must set while developing an intimate relationship prior to marriage?
2. The Emerging Church: What can traditional or established churches learn from “emerging” churches?
1. The Regulative Principle: Do you believe that the Scripture not only regulates our theology but also our methodology? In other words, do you believe in the regulative principle? If so, to what degree? If not, why not?
My Opinion
As you can see, some of this is pretty heady and some of it is pretty practical, but most all of it is interesting. One of my favorite things about Driscoll’s writing style is how well-stated and organized his books are. He manages again and again to state an unbelievable amount of information in a concise, understandable, well-organized, digestable-for-nearly-anyone format. Even if you are a pastor, and think you already know your answer / opinion on all of these questions, this is a useful resource. Because let’s face it, unless you’re D.A. Carson or John Piper, Driscoll probably answers these questions better than you would.
My favorite chapters are: Birth Control, Predestination, Sexual Sin, Dating, and The Emerging Church. I would argue that each of these chapters warrant the purchase of the book alone.
Really good read!
p.s. – you can watch all the sermons online rather than read here:
http://www.marshillchurch.org/media/religionsaves?direction=asc&order_by=date
Related Posts:
No commentsYou Should Probably Read The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama
A Review of The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (Abridged) by Barack Obama
A Halt in Normalcy
Due to the halt in normalcy that the Nashville Flood of 2010 brought these last two days, I listened to the audiobook version of Barack Obama’s The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. It was only upon the completion of the book that I realized it was a much-loathed abridged version. However, after rescanning audible.com, I realized that there was not an unabridged version of the audiobook available, and that somehow made me feel less cheated. I also discovered upon further investigation, that only one chapter, “The World Beyond Our Borders,” seems to have been left out of the abridged version. So I feel even less cheated, or at the very least, more secure in my assumption that I missed little of the content in full version of the book. Besides, the audiobook version is enhanced over the written form because Obama performs the narration himself. So I’m happy.
As the title of my review indicates, I believe you should probably read this book. And I believe that you should probably read The Audacity of Hope for at least three reasons: understanding, respect, and challenge. Reason number one: understanding. Barack Obama is our president, and the power and authority that he possesses greatly influence the lives of all Americans; we should understand his thinking if we can. And I might add, a book seems to allow him to explain himself in a more well-rounded way than a speech or a debate. Reason number two: respect. Despite your opinion about the politics of Barack Obama, he is a real person just like you and me. This book will, I believe, help readers to more readily respect him as a person, even if they disagree with his brand of politics. I grew up hating Bill Clinton, in fact villainizing him, because he was a Democrat. That’s a poor reason to despise someone. We should try to separate personal attacks from political opinions when possible. That is what I would appreciate if I were in the fishbowl-public-eye like President Obama. Reason number three: challenge. This text, whether you agree, disagree, or partially agree with its opinions, will cause you to think deeply about political issues in America. Obama’s candor makes The Audacity of Hope easy to read, but it is still challenging to think about. Obama will make your political opinions sharper. For all these reasons and more, I say you should read The Audacity of Hope.
Review
I’m honestly not really sure that I have the patience or the time to fully review all of the contents of this book. So like usual, I’m going to highlight a few topics that have me arguing with myself, and I hope to involve you in that discussion.
Complexity
Much of Obama’s dream about how politics should be approached in America are quite admirable. He talks about “different politics,” politics that are less partisan, less composed of concrete idealism, and more understanding of each side’s point of view. To quote him, “A government that truly represents these Americans, that truly serves these Americans, will require a different kind of politics. That politics will need to reflect our lives as they are actually lived. It won’t be prepackaged, ready to pull off the shelf. It will have to be constructed from the best of our traditions, and will have to account for the darker aspects of our past” (00:32:00). The description of “prepackaged politics” is what especially rings true to me in this quote. I have ideas, especially regarding moral issues such as abortion (i.e. murder), upon which I will not bend. There is no grey on this issue. Murder is wrong; abortion is wrong. However, despite my strong opinion on this issue, I agree with Obama that much of the debate within politics is less certain. It is less black and white and more complex. And I appreciate that Obama realizes this complexity.
Postmodernity
I posted a link to an article about a year ago that highlighted the idea that Barack Obama might be our first postmodern president. I agree with many of the thoughts expressed in that article, and after listening to The Audacity of Hope, I’m more convinced that Obama sees truth through a very postmodern lens. For instance, he highlights the different manners in which people interpret the Constitution. As he explains, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Scalia argues that the Constitution has a single meaning, and only a single meaning, and that it should be interpreted based on the original intent of the authors. While other Supreme Court justices, such as Breyer, argue that the Constitution is a “living document,” and that the founders taught us mainly “how to think, not what to think.” This second view, the one that Obama takes, is extremely postmodern. It maximizes the reader’s role in determining the meaning of the document, and minimizes the writer’s role in determining the meaning of the document. This postmodernistic interpretational method is essentially relativism in disguise. To quote Obama, we should view our democracy “not as a house to be built, but a conversation to be had” (1:57:00). While this sounds amazing, and quite Rob Bell-esque I might add, it’s anti-logical and self-defeating. If everything has multiple meanings, then how can anything have actual meaning? It sucks when what you said is reinterpreted to mean something totally different from what you originally meant, and then you are denigrated for saying something that is quite the opposite of what you actually said, but were determined to have said by others who reinterpreted your words. Even Obama bemoans an article that he wrote for Time Magazine that was later taken out of context and reinterpreted by Peggy Noonan. And yet Obama’s own precepts of epistemology preclude this as a valid complaint if everything has various meanings.
Additionally, Obama is very sensitive in attempting to understand the individual views of different people upon every issue. He sees, (and I’m not attempting to put words in his mouth here), the good and the bad of each person’s opinion. While there is nothing wrong with empathizing in this way, it sometimes ignores the larger issue of actual truth, actual facts. If there is a right and a wrong, then the question is not about my opinion, or your opinion, but about the facts of the situation. Personally speaking, I want to strike a balance between recognizing truth and understanding different viewpoints. Postmodernity can’t strike this balance. As I stated above, not everything in politics is tidy, and I like that Obama recognizes this fact, but I think that many times he may ignore the actual truth, in order to understand how someone else feels.
Faith
I appreciate much of what Barack Obama says about the intersection of faith and politics. He is right, I believe, when he says that, “Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of non-believers” (4:20:00). Personally speaking, it’s frustrating for me to hear the old chant of the religious right that “America is a Christian nation.” Do the chanters of such a statement even understand what they mean by “Christian nation?” I mean what is a Christian nation? Is it a nation composed of a majority of Christians? That’s not America. Is it a nation based on Christian principles? That’s only partially true of America. Is it a nation where the Bible is held by all to be the only standard of truth? That’s not true of America either. So I agree with Obama that we are not a Christian nation. In fact I recognize, as does Obama, that the phrase “separation of church and state,” is a good thing. It’s a principle that Baptists (my own upbringing) helped fight for hundreds of years ago. It’s a needed understanding of the intersection of faith and government, so that the beliefs of others, including my own, are not infringed upon by the government.
The hairy-ness of this separation clause comes in to play when we try to apply it to policy making. How do we make policies that allow religious liberty for everyone without somehow assenting to a common religious / faith-based view that trumps all others?
Obama sees the public sphere as one in which faith is included, but not used as the sole foundation for which to determine policy. As he explains, people of faith need to translate their moral arguments into universal arguments so that they can be discussed by everyone, even those who do not share your personal brand of faith. In this way faith is involved in our discussions, but those of differing faiths, or no faith at all, can still enter into the political discussion and argue on a level playing field. The idea being discussed has been reworded into non-faith language and is now accessible to everyone. This makes a certain amount of sense to me, but I’m not sure it can truly happen without assigning religion a secondary status and removing it from the conversation altogether (which is the very thing Obama is striving to avoid).
The logic of Obama’s argument is this: I cannot expect another person, who disagrees with me that the Bible is true, to accept my opinion about war if I base my argument solely on my biblical arguments. I need to translate the principles of my argument into non-Christian terms, so that others can then enter into the discussion about the fitness of my argument. In this way I have argued for the truth of the Bible, without using the Bible as my source of morality.
My problem with this stance is that it forces a false dichotomy between faith and science. Obama argues that faith and science play by different sets of rules. Faith is unprovable, while science, he argues, is provable. But this is simply not true. Evolution is theory. Gravity is a theory. Electricity is a theory. These theories seem to explain truth, but they are not completely provable. Science is based on set of presuppositions. Without science’s presuppositions, it cannot operate. Religion too is based on a set of presuppositions. Obama wants to take all religious language and translate it into scientific / logical language when it is used in the public sphere because he “believes” science to be provable and religion to be unprovable. In this way he reveals that his trust is actually placed more in science than it is in religion. Despite his attempts to accept both as equally valid, he places science / logic (with its own unprovable presuppositions) as his framework for truth, and in turn places religion in a secondary place of importance. His faith becomes more of a fairytale faith. Unprovable. What’s good for you is good for you. And what’s good for me is good for me. But we shouldn’t try to prove each other right or wrong. We can’t because this is all just “religious talk.”
Since everyone is going to disagree on the presuppositions that are the most tenable in the public sphere, what is the foundation upon which we should decide policy? My argument is that it has to be the Constitution. The Constitution, imperfect as it is, must be the foundation of our policy decisions. Anything beyond what the Constitution describes must be written into law based upon the opinions of the people. The will of the people will determine new policy, and the people are free to use religious or non-religious reasoning in their argumentation for or against policy. This seems to make sense to me. I could be off my rocker, but it seems to make sense. Ultimately, this will mean that our government is faulted because its policies will often be anti-biblical. But isn’t this already the case? Obama’s assumptions about truth necessarily give religion a secondary status within public debate, and I believe assigning religion that secondary standing cuts through the heart of its power.
I Could Go On
I could go on with further ideas about Barack Obama and his book The Audacity of Hope. I still haven’t touched his ideas about the economy, healthcare, or race. And he has some good ideas about these subjects. But it’s now 3:00AM in the morning and “I must be lonely,” and I’m making pop song references, so I’m going to stop. If you are so inclined to read this book, I’d appreciate your personal feedback. My opinions may be idiotic, and your musings (provided they are kindly expressed) may help me to think less idiotically. At the very least, I’m sure my thinking could use some refining that your thinking might encourage.
Related Posts:
No commentsMaybe the best sermon I’ve ever heard…
Maybe. I’m not entirely sure, but maybe, John Piper’s sermon at the Together For the Gospel Conference 2010, is my favorite sermon ever. I love the ministry of John Piper. I’m not worshipping the man, but I thoroughly appreciate how God uses John Piper to bless my life and point me towards Jesus. This sermon from T4G2010 is simply amazing. In this sermon, Piper asks the question, “Did Jesus preach the message of imputation that Paul clearly preached?” In other words, “Did Paul alter the message of Jesus?” or “Are Jesus’ and Paul’s theology the same?” Piper’s answer is a resounding yes. Jesus and the Apostle Paul are in complete agreement, and his exegesis to prove this point is remarkable. This sermon is eye-opening and highly applicable to many of the errant teachings of emergent teachers (although Piper never makes that direct application himself in the sermon). I highly commend it for your consideration.
Manuscript http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/2352_did_jesus_preach_pauls_gospel/
Audio http://www.t4g.org/resources/
Related Posts:
1 commentBook Review: Surprised by Joy by C. S. Lewis
Surprised by Joy is C.S. Lewis’ “sort of” autobiography. In the book, he traces his early childhood through his conversion to Christianity while teaching at Oxford.
This year has been a year of C.S. Lewis for me personally. He’s an author that I’ve admired for years, but only because of the admiration that other authors (whom I enjoy) have for him. Admittedly, I had never finished any C. S. Lewis book (with the exception of the first two Narnia books when I was a kid) until this year. Now I’ve finished five. Because of my current interest in Lewis, I read with great interest this autobiography of his early life and conversion.
Surprised by Joy is by far the most rapturous of Lewis’ writing that I’ve encountered so far. His description of the English and Irish countryside is superb, his story is so far removed from my own that his story is other-worldly, and the depth of his understanding of literature and philosophy is inspiring. Lewis is at the same time both wonderful for his imagination, and wonderful for his understanding of complex ideas. He was a man who felt deeply and thought deeply. A pattern I would like to mimic in my own life.
The conversion of C. S. Lewis is beautiful. It is a story that unfolds slowly through the book. God first began to capture his heart through small glimpses of “Joy” in both literature, music, and nature. As Lewis sought to recapture this “Joy” it fled from him, proving unattainable time and again. Joy would reappear, unexpected, throughout his life, and eventually became a clue that helped point him towards the God he most desired to believe did not exist. His conversion, unlike many, was gradual and slow. God pursued and broke through the barriers in Lewis’ mind until he could no longer deny His existence.
My favorite sentence in the book is, “The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation” (219). In this quote, Lewis betrays the miracle that the Spirit performed on his heart in bringing him to Christ. He did not want God to be real, and God’s pursuit of him seemed at times “hard,” but it was in fact “kindness.” Jesus’ pursuit of Lewis’ seemed to be compulsive, but it proved to be liberating. This description is beautiful, and reminds me of what I felt at seven years old, when God drew me to Himself.
I love this book. It inspires me to read classic literature, enjoy the beauty all around me, think hard about God, and feel emotion fully. Surprised by Joy is essential reading for anyone wishing to understand Lewis, and it is by far my favorite Lewis book so far.
Related Posts:
No comments7 Characteristics of Highly Evangelistic Christians
I know I haven’t done a good job sharing my faith the last several years. Part of the reason has been due to disillusionment, but part of the reason has just been plain old disobedience too.
After graduating from a seminary (in 2006) that required me to share my faith regularly (but in a somewhat formulaic way), I’ve struggled to figure out the best method for sharing the Gospel. For the record, I’m not opposed to being asked to share my faith (by a church or a seminary), in fact I think it can be a really good thing. The one thing I am opposed to is the mandate that I have to ask the person I am witnessing to, “Would you like to accept Christ today as your personal Lord and Savior?” even when I invariably know that their answer will be, “no.” This is not a bad question necessarily, but in a situation where body language indicates that a person has no intention of being converted, or in a situation where the comprehension of the Gospel by the person being witnessed to is still lacking, I don’t like being forced to ask that question. At the seminary that I attended, this question was necessary for the witnessing experience to “count” as part of our requirement to regularly share our faith. I have a problem with that specific rule because it left me feeling like I was sometimes forcefeeding the Gospel to someone who didn’t want it or didn’t understand it.
The other struggle that I have is that I doubt the the effectiveness of door-to-door evangelism. I know that many people have been, and still are being, led to relationships with Christ through door-to-door methods. However, the question I have is, “For all the people that are led to Christ using door-to-door evangelism, are even more left with a bad taste in their mouth by the experience?” I don’t know the answer to this question to be honest, but I struggle with this fear. I do know that making friendships with others, and inviting them to church, and speaking truth into their lives spreads the Gospel. But oftentimes I am lazy, and a coward, and not nearly bold enough in my witnessing when I use this “lifestyle” method.
So I want to strike a balance in personal evangelism between legalistic tendencies and formulaic approaches on one end, and laziness and fear and apathy on the other end. I’m trying to get better, and I want to be obedient. So, in that vein, I found this article on the 7 characteristics of highly evangelistic Christians encouraging. I didn’t come up with this list, it is a partial repost of Thom Rainer’s blog http://www.thomrainer.com/2010/03/seven-characteristics-of-highly-evangelistic-christians.php
7 characteristics of Highly Evangelistic Christians
1. They are people of prayer. They realize that only God can convict and convert, and they are totally dependent upon Him in prayer. Most of the highly evangelistic Christians spend at least an hour in prayer each day.
2. They have a theology that compels them to evangelize. They believe in the urgency of the gospel message. They believe that Christ is the only way of salvation. They believe that anyone without Christ is doomed for a literal hell.
3. They are people who spend time in the Word. The more time they spend in the Bible, they more likely they are to see the lostness of humanity and the love of God in Christ to save those who are lost.
4. They are compassionate people. Their heart breaks for those who don’t have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. They have learned to love the world by becoming more like Christ who has the greatest love for the world.
5. They love the communities where God has placed them. They are immersed in the culture because they desire for the light of Christ to shine through them in their communities.
6. They are intentional about evangelism. They pray for opportunities to share the gospel. They look for those opportunities. And they see many so-called casual encounters as appointments set by God.
7. They are accountable to someone for their evangelistic activities. They know that many good activities can replace Great Commission activities if they are not careful. Good can replace the best. So they make certain that someone holds them accountable each week either formally or informally for their evangelistic efforts.
