As usual, I think Seth G might be on to something.
Instead of concentrating on winning over the nay-sayers to your cause / business plan / message / school budget, simply find a way to get the people who are likely to say yes.
"My school realizes this. They hold the spring concert the same night
at the budget vote. 200 parents at a concert are only a few steps away
from the voting booth in the gym. Starbucks realizes the same thing
when they put their stores directly in the path of yuppies who like
spending $4 for a cup of coffee. You don’t find many Starbucks at bus
stations."Instead of focusing on arguing with people who say no, it might be easier to get near the people who like to say yes.
I wonder if something similar could be said about church-planting and evangelism. When Jesus sent out his disciples in Matthew 10 he told them:
"As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near!’
Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give. . . And if anyone will not welcome you or listen to your message, shake the dust off your feet as you leave that house or that town." (v 7-8, 13)
In other words, don’t bend over backwards trying to convince the nay-sayers. If people aren’t open to the message, move on and find some people who are. Find the ones who are ready to say yes. You don’t win brownie-points for spending all your time on a "hard case." Concentrate your efforts on those who want to hear, on those who are ready to respond.
What do you think? Is this an appropriate principle for missional church? Or a piece of "worldly" wisdom to be thrown out? Are Seth Godin and Jesus saying the same things?
The problem with this is that the roles are reversed. The Gospel is preached because others need it, and not because we are in need of people accepting it (or at least we better not be). But Seth G’s approach is for the messenger(business,cause,etc.) who is in need of the “yes”. No one ever agonized in spirit over someone who didn’t want a hotdog! I don’t see this path leading to anywhere but indifference; which is often falsely labeled as love.
No, Jesus and Seth are not saying the same thing, because the intent dictates the value assessed to the admonition. We can’t be certain of any man’s intent, that is, in the immediate sense. But Jesus is not any man, and He gave it as a command and not a suggestion. And in the case of a command, the one who gives it takes on the responsibility for the outcome. But in the case of a suggestion coming from a man, the responsibility lies on the one who puts the suggestion into action. Jesus is trustworthy in the matter of spreading the Gospel. Seth G. is not. Leave the world to depend on their own “wisdom”. Let the Church rely on God’s wisdom.
This is a huge topic full of tensions. I don’t think it is possible to claim singular methodology here. I really like the idea that “they don’t care what you know until they know that you care.” This could mean either care about them or care about God and His purpose. But this comes in different flavors based on world view, pensonalities, giftings, maturity, situations, etc. Plus you add the role of the Holy Spirit to convict, bring to rememberence, etc, and our role could be viewed more supportive and cooperative than primary. When do we become responsible? When are we not responsible? When are “they” responsible? So, I don’t see this as an either/or issue but a yes/and issue. Experiment if you like, test the fruit, discern the spirit, either stick with it or “move on”.
It reminds me of how the word of God is a dividing force. What I mean has to do with several words of God that come to mind. In the “Hebrews” letter, it talks about how the word of God is alive and active and cuts right to the heart, dividing one thing from another and showing exactly what people’s true intentions are (good or evil). Jesus also told his guys that he came to earth to bring a sword and not peace, and that families would be divided, because some would receive the good news and some would not. It also reminds me of the “sheep” being divided from the “goats” in the final judgment – those who served Jesus in action and those who did not.
So, I guess my point would be that Jesus told his guys to preach the Gospel to every creature, to take it all over the world. They did not know in advance who would believe and who would not, so they told everyone. It does appear to me like Jesus is saying that, after preaching, people will establish what side they’re on by how they respond. Once you see the message received, disciple and nurture and love the new believers. Where you see it rejected, move on. You’ve been faithful to preach, and they were given the grace of a choice, and they chose poorly because their hearts were evil.
That’s how I see it, based on the scripture you cited. Again too, God’s children are those who follow the Spirit. So, that to me is a big part of the answer of how we deal with folks. Look at the conversation Peter had with Simon the sorcerer.
Thanks for the comments, folks (and sorry so long in response).
David: I would argue that the ultimate reason for preaching the gospel is not people’s need, but God’s glory. Paul seemed to see his ministry as his worship to God, not his response to the needs around him. I do see your point, though – the gospel is a different deal than selling coffee. I agree with that one 😉
Bob and Peter: you guys touched on the connection I was seeing in preaching the gospel and Seth’s post. It’s not that we only preach to those who are likely to say yes, but that we preach to all, and we watch for fruit – where is the gospel sprouting and bringing life? We turn our attention there, not to ignore the “tough cases” but to cooperate with what the Spirit is doing in our preaching.
There are so many good comments here I’m not sure how I can add to it. This is also an older post but I haven’t visited for awhile so I was catching up. I’ll be honest I have real issues with the whole concept of evangelism. I know too many people that have been burned. By that I mean they have had the word preached to them, joined a church and were abandoned to find their way. Not being critical but I think that alot of churches today focus more on conversion than growth and care of their flock afterword. I personally believe that the first 5 years after conversion there is more spiritual warfare that takes place than at that initial moment of meeting Christ. Anyway, what I do believe is that our lives are our greatest act of evangelism. By laying down our lives in love to all those that we meet, by praising God in our lives,making our lives worship, like Peter said Paul did above(that was fun to write)we bring Christ into the lives of all those we meet. We have to have faith that the Holy Spirit will use that when it is needed. I have often found that someone might give me a word from the Lord that I did not hear or recognize at the time. When the Holy Spirit had softened my heart I remembered those words. I feel that too often today we want immediate gratification while God is patient and knocks at the door until we open it. The Lord’s will is often accomplished in spite of us. Therefor, while I do believe that there are some people that are truly called to Evangilism I believe that most of us are called to live in love, to lay down our lives to all those we meet every day.
Thanks for commenting, Christina. I always appreciate your perspective. I have been wrestling for awhile with how to more closely integrate evangelism with everyday life, how to make our verbal witness more organically linked to our lived, or embodied witness. I think there might be a clue in looking at Jesus, and how his “embodied witness” of the Father was so organically linked to his verbal witness. Perhaps the way the written Word relates to the Living Word is the way verbal witness relates to embodied witness.
Good comments on this post!
Ben,
In regards to your last comment, I have struggled with the same issue. My conclusion is that if we truly believe that Word, then our lives will follow the pattern that we hold as being the highest. That is the only way I know that the two can be integrated; to what extent are we willing to suffer the ramifications of completely enrusting our lives to Him and His ways. “Unless you pick up your cross and follow me you cannot be my disciple.”