In the fall of 1987 I began my freshman year of college. I was far from home, overwhelmed and lonely on a campus of 20,000 students. While sitting alone in the cafeteria one afternoon, an older student walked up, smiled and asked if he could join me. I was starved for conversation and thrilled to have the company. He sat his tray down in front of mine and took a seat as I prepared to engage him in a heady discussion of his choosing. Politics, philosophy, science. I was mentally preparing for anything he threw at me.
Glancing up from his plate of spaghetti, he asked, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior?”
For a few seconds I was stunned, completely at a loss for a response. “Um, yeah, actually I have.” I finally managed in reply.
“Oh,” he said, clearly disappointed. “Okay, that’s good.” He wore a look of minor defeat. He had chosen the wrong table; no soul would be won for Christ over this lunch. We chatted politely while I finished my burger. He ate quickly and excused himself.
After that lunch, I never saw him again.
For many years afterward whenever I would hear the word “evangelism” I would think of that day. It always reminded of the Jewish exorcists who tried to use Jesus name to cast out some demons. Unimpressed by their approach, the evil spirit says in reply: "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?"
The young man was earnest and sincerely wanted to do “God’s work.” But evangelism isn’t a form of Multi-Level Marketing and the “Good News” isn’t an Amway product. The least he could have done was ask my name before trying to save my soul. If your going to ask about a “personal savior” then at least get to know the person.
The term “evangelism” derives from the greek word evangel – “good news.” So it’s rather odd how so much evangelism appears to be about “selling” Jesus and hoping that you can convince the unsaved heathen to “buy” into salvation. This was the way I had been taught during Vacation Bible School classes at the First Baptist Church of Fire and Brimstone. Pass out Chick tracts, recite the canned “how to get saved” speech, get them to say the sinner’s prayer. Above all, close the deal. They may die at any time and their souls would be lost to eternal damnation if I didn’t “make the sell.” At eight years old I was a cross between Billy Graham and Willy Loman.
Whenever I began to seriously read the Gospels, though, I noticed something strange. People constantly flocked to Jesus despite the fact that he never passed out a single tract. He would walk up to people and say “Follow me” and the next thing you know they're giving up their lives to follow him around the countryside. How does he do it, I’d ask my parents and church leaders. “Well,” they’d say as they pondered the question (obviously for the first time), “He is, well, you know, Jesus.”
That answer always seemed to be a cop out. But then one day I was reading these opening lines to Augustine’s Confessions and it hit me:
"Great art thou, O Lord, and greatly to be praised; great is thy power, and infinite is thy wisdom." And man desires to praise thee, for he is a part of thy creation; he bears his mortality about with him and carries the evidence of his sin and the proof that thou dost resist the proud. Still he desires to praise thee, this man who is only a small part of thy creation. Thou hast prompted him, that he should delight to praise thee, for thou hast made us for thyself and restless is our heart until it comes to rest in thee.
The people responded to Jesus the way they did because he is, well, you know, God. He is what our hearts have always been seeking. When we come face to face with him we may accept or reject him. But we can’t not know him. Calvin claimed that there is an awareness or sense of God (sensus divinitatis) implanted in all people by nature. The context of this universally distributed belief being rather minimal: there is a God, He is the Creator, and that He ought to be worshipped.* Alvin Plantinga interprets this as being more akin to a disposition to form a religious belief. Not surprisingly, when people came face to face with their Creator they were inspired to follow him and to boldly proclaim the gospel.
How different our situation is today. Some Christians (particularly new ones that are still enthused by their budding faith) are still eager and willing to “share Christ.” Others have a more difficult time. I suspect that the average Christians hesitancy to “witness”, though, has little to do with timidity or lack of courage. After all, many a believer would have no problem explaining why they support a particular political position, yet become tongue-tied when the topic turns to religion or (gasp) Jesus himself.
I suspect that much of the fault lies with our misunderstanding of “faith.” In our age, the term has become almost synonymous with an irrational (or at least nonrational) acceptance of beliefs for which we lack evidence. When we Christians accept such an idea it’s no wonder that the nonbelievers don’t feel the need to take us seriously!
But our faith isn’t a matter of accepting fideism. The “good news” isn’t about a religious belief but about a person. The heart of the gospel isn’t about accepting certain doctrines, as important as they may be, but in submitting to a person, the fully divine, fully human being we call Christ. And while the nonbeliever may not have experiential knowledge, they do have an inherent disposition to recognize Him. That is the common religious foundation we share with them.
Our evangelistic mission, therefore, is simply to share with others the “good news” that they too can know what we know. Sometimes this will require us “sharing our faith” by telling others about our own experiences. Other times it can mean removing the “worldview underbrush” that prevents them from seeing clearly what they, by disposition, can and should know. Most times, though, it will simply mean living as if we really believed that the gospel truly is good news for believers right here, right now, and not just in the hereafter.
While I believe some forms of evangelism are ineffective if not downright counterproductive, I don’t want to presume to say how God can or cannot spread the “good news.” It is quite possible that He could use such methods as prayer cards or religious tracts to bring the lost to salvation and redemption. In fact, I believe that it’s even possible that he might be able to use evangelical Christians to further the work of his Kingdom. Not likely, perhaps, but possible. The Lord can, after all, work miracles.
1
lovely post, man. for more thoughts on this stuff check out stavesacre lead singer mark salomon's new book, 'Simplicity'. We've got a review on our site.
posted on 07.23.2004 3:22 AM2
In fact, I believe that it’s even possible that he might be able to use evangelical Christians to further the work of his Kingdom. Not likely, perhaps, but possible. The Lord can, after all, work miracles.
The fact is, Joe, I know he does. The fact is every tool we have is used improperly by us in some way. Remember, moses had a speech impediment and Paul admitted he was a lack-luster public speaker. Heck, Peter and Jonah didn't even want to preach to the people they were called to, so the fact that you have evangelical Christians attempting the task is more than can be said of those two!
However, that doesn't negate the serious flaw in how mainline evangelicals approach such things. The largest problem is that they fail to cultivate sincere and deep relationships, failing those bonds as more than mere opportunities for making the "sale."
posted on 07.23.2004 3:23 AM4
“Oh,” he said, clearly disappointed. “Okay, that’s good.”
Think how different your opinion would have been if instead he had said, "Cool! I noticed you are sitting alone, so how are you adjusting to college life? If I can help let me know. Here's how to get in touch with me. By the way, I am on an evangelism sweep so I need to go and find a lost soul. Have a great day in the Lord."
posted on 07.23.2004 7:38 AM5
I once spent an unpleasant couple of minutes trying to convince a Campus Crusade worker that I didn't need her instruction or to say the Sinner's prayer, as I was a lifelong Lutheran. She said she had been raised Lutheran but during her catechism class hadn't really learned much about her savior. Well, I HAD.
posted on 07.23.2004 8:52 AM6
Joe, May I take issue on a point about your understanding of the gospels. I see people flocking to Jesus when He is healing, giving free meals through miracles...but when He begins to challenge them about self-denial, it is THEN they begin to depart. Check out John 6 for an example.
My concern about modern evangelism is the "seeker friendly" church. Quite often, a serious examination of life, Christ's teachings and such are absent, maybe for fear of being labelled "fire and brimstone".
I see your point about this student. I agree that it is proper to develop a relationship with another first. I disagree with your take on tracts, as they are quotes of the word of God, though again there is a time and a place.
However, I recall that when I was this guy's age I was drinking, going to strip clubs, and watching lots of porn. I can't tell you how much I wish I was rather making the "mistakes" of this young man in witnessing to strangers for Christ.
posted on 07.23.2004 9:38 AM7
Recently, as I walked through the University of Tennessee campus, I noticed a female street evangelist with 50 or so students gathered to listen. As always when time allows, I paused to listen. Her topic was sexual abstinence. She loudly proclaimed that many of the young women who performed the abomination of fellatio would later succumb to stomach cancer. Her reasoning? Well, reproductive material, like cancer, tended to rapid cell division. She somehow ignored the fact that sperm must encounter an egg for such processes to begin. I pointed this out to her, and she held me up as an example of how the devil uses science to attack the word of God. She then pointed straight at me and accused me of being an agent of the devil. Had I actually been an agent of the devil, I'm sure he would have sent me prepared to respond in some clever way, Instead, I merely muttered, "You're crazy, lady" and walked on.
Here is my question: do you believe this woman is doing the lord's work? If not, is she an agent of the devil sent to discredit Christianity, or is she just a freelance nut?
P.S. I am not suggesting that her approach is typical of campus evangelists.
8
Great post, Joe. I have been a Christian since 1996, and my own conversion experience was largely the result of long-term exposure to Christian friends and acquaintances who were, simply, living lives worth emulating. I agree that it is not for us to say how God will use people, and there are certainly people who claim to have been saved by "tract wranglers" and street corner preachers. But overwhelmingly, I think the most effective form of evangelism is to live a life that reflects and honors Christ, with honesty and integrity.
posted on 07.23.2004 10:39 AM9
Yeah, so many pet peeves of mine are tied in here.
The 'gospel' as pop-psych self-help, instead of Law and Gospel = the Cross.
Total cluelessness as to the culture and mindset of the person being talked to.
The inadvertant communication of the pathos of the inauthenticity of the salesman. (I'm sure there has got to be a better, -English- way of saying that)
The ignorance of the content of the Bible on the part of that street preacher (or she really was like the demon possessing the young woman in Ephesus)
Etc.
(David Well's _God in the Wasteland_ would be a good place to start. Dr. Schaeffer's _The God Who is There_ would be an excellent place to start learning how to communicate the Gospel to the postmodern (he was one of the very first to use the term, back in 1968)
posted on 07.23.2004 11:35 AM10
"Preach the Gospel always, and when necessary use words" - St Francis of Assisi
posted on 07.23.2004 11:39 AM11
Ooooo, this almost gave me flashbacks like a 'Nam Vet. The "Christ as Amway Upline" school of evangelism.
One splinter church that messed up my mind in the Seventies actually believed that the only thing Christ would judge Christians on was how many converts they made. This put them under unbelievable pressure to put as many notches in their Bible as they could -- especially when combined with the verses that if you don't witness and they die unsaved, "God will HOLD YOU RESPONSIBLE!" (Christainese for Hell). This led to some really insane and desperate "witnessing tactics". I myself ended up as a notch on half a dozen Bibles that way.
--
Many years ago, I was involved in a church young adult group (unrelated to the above) when a Billy Graham crusade came to town. The group leaders recommended everyone "invite your unsaved friends".
This caused a stir among many of the group, i.e. "I've got to go out and make unsaved friends so I can get them to the Crusade and get them saved."
I responded that this was friendship under false pretenses and if they did, and the "friend" they'd made found out that was why, he/she'd be justified in gunning for them. Needless to say, I was not popular.
--
Rob: I vote for "freelance nut". AKA "Jesus Fanboy". (Ever thought that the Parable of the Sheep and Goats is God saying "Go Away, Fanboys!"?)
posted on 07.23.2004 11:52 AM12
P.S. My church counts Fideism ("Don't think, just BE-LEEEEVE!") as a heresy.
For pretty much the reasons stated here -- if you have so much faith you've turned off your brain, where's your reality check? You can go off on a destructive tangent without knowing it until you self-destruct with a helluva lot of collateral damage.
posted on 07.23.2004 11:58 AM13
I am not a big fan of the St. Francis quote, since it sure does not reconcile along with Scripture like Romans 10. As we have often discussed here, the atheist is often a loving, giving person too.
However, I do understand the sentiment. As long as one does not put the cart before the horse.
It is my strong belief that everyone we know closely, coworkers, family, close neighbors, should also know we are Christians. This must be FIRST, and it is not too hard, but it does take a step on our part. "What did you do this weekend? Went to my church and heard a really good Bible teaching. How about you?"
THEN..the issue of lifestyle becomes key, because of course now we are on display. And now the St. Francis quote would also apply.
In fact, this is the key reason I think that many are silent about their personal faith, since they know it will mean they must get serious about their words and actions. No laughing at the dirty jokes. No office gossip etc.
There is also a place to let strangers know of our faith, besides walking up to them with a tract. I have had opportunity to return extra change made by mistake from a cashier several times, and each time they usually say "How nice" or "many people wouldn't do that". I simply reply that I am a Christian and I know the Lord would not want me to take it. (AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE SMILING WHEN YOU SAY IT. IF YOU ACT LIKE YOU REALLY WANT TO KEEP IT, BUT HO HUM, I AM A CHRISTIAN SO I CAN'T..IT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE)
At the least I have left a positive witness for Christ, at the most I might be talking to someone who is really searching and it may lead somewhere, but in ANY CASE it comes across as natural.
posted on 07.23.2004 12:42 PM14
My vote: freelance nut.
To STEVE_IN_CORONA: the seeker-friendly church can be seen as just another form of "selling" the gospel. The danger in seeker churches is a lop-sided view of the nature of God (heavy on Love, light on Justice). The gospel is packaged as "what Jesus can do for you," but "sin" is not in their working vocabulary. Self-improvement instead of spiritual rebirth.
† † †
For most of us without the spiritual gift of evangelism (I'm leaving that group alone for the moment, though I'm not condoning everything they do, either), effective and natural evangelism is very much about striving to live a holy life; for its own sake, and so that we don't shame God in front of non-believers, and developing authentic relationships with those around us. Let's remember Matt. 5:16: "Even so let your light shine before men; that they may see your good works, and glorify your father who is in heaven." We should have our acquaintances come up to us and say, "Bob, you're DIFFERENT somehow…"
But they don't, because they can't taste any salty holiness in our lives. We're not unique: we're just selling new, improved Jesus, with 10% more self-esteem booster. If we were to combine true humility with a quest for personal holiness, we would seem much more intriguing to non-believers.
posted on 07.23.2004 1:24 PM15
Joe says:
"I suspect that much of the fault lies with our misunderstanding of “faith.” In our age, the term has become almost synonymous with an irrational (or at least nonrational) acceptance of beliefs for which we lack evidence. When we Christians accept such an idea it’s no wonder that the nonbelievers don’t feel the need to take us seriously!"
I don't agree with this. (surprise);-) But then I don't need scientific or empirical proof that God exists to believe in him. To me all the arguments trying to "prove" God are irrelevant.
The main problem I have with your way of thinking is that I think a belief in God does, and should, contain an element of personal risk. Not a risk of physical danger, but a risk of ego.
To believe in God is to surrender your own wisdom, intelligence, and free will to something you believe is better qualified than yourself to make those decisions.
But you make a choice and take a risk that God does not exist. That you may be wrong.
Now, you may eventually come to believe in God at the deepest core of your soul.
The paradox is that you have to go through a journey of faith, that includes doubt, in order to get there.
You can't believe in God unless you see the proof of God’s hand guiding you. And if you don’t make the journey you can’t see the proof.
First steps are always done in blind faith. You choose to follow God’s will even though you are not sure he exists. This is the “leap of faith”. The risk you have to take.
You close your eyes and step into the abyss, trusting in God to lift you up. And you may fall more than a few times. But if you persevere, eventually, you are able to look back at your life and you can see how and when God has guided you to come to places you could never imagine.
In the end, this is the only real proof you will accept in your heart. It’s the existence of God as a personal force in your own life.
After that, you can start to look around to see God in the world that he made. But to try to do this first, before the journey of faith, is to try and take a shortcut. You want to believe in God without taking the element of personal risk.
You can base your belief in God purely in what you see in the natural world. It may work for awhile, but it’s an impersonal faith that is not as secure, and does not have the rewards, of seeing God’s personal hand in your own life.
And as a far as “nonbelievers don’t feel the need to take us seriously!”.
This is not because of the “irrational” nature of choosing to believe in God. In everyday, practical example, it’s because of the incongruity between what Christians say and what they do.
It was, incidentally, for this reason that I left Christianity. Because those around me did not live their lives as they preached at others to do, I could not believe them. They didn’t have any credibility. Very few do.
If you really want to see a successful evangelist, look to the ones that keep their mouths shut. The ones that live the words more than they say the words.
It’s their example, in the way that they live their lives that leads others to God, because other people look to them and see something they want for themselves.
And when asked, the evangelist can say, “well, this is what worked for me”. Because they have made their own journey of faith, they are able to give real-life examples of how their belief in God helped them in their own lives. And they can also share how they got through their doubts. How they handled the hard times.
They don’t have to give a lecture on the values and semantics of “Intelligent Design” or whatever else is the current “Big Word” of the month. And they don’t have to try and scare people into believing in God with “THIS IS THE LAW OF GOD AND YOU MUST OBEY OR SUFFER HELLFIRE”. They don’t even have to be some sort of icon of goodness that others should live up to.
They can just be regular folk, simply and quietly sharing how their faith in God has helped them in their own lives. There just is no more effective method to spread real faith than in this way.
posted on 07.23.2004 1:29 PM16
What about becoming all things to all men that by all means some might be saved? Just because someone doesn't do something well doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. I've shared the Four Spiritual Laws to a complete stranger on Guam, and he seemingly confessed a new belief in Jesus Christ as his Savior. Another time I shared the Wordless Book with an African-American child in St. Louis, who then asked Jesus to come into his life. And I also shared the gospel with a village youth in Papua New Guinea, who barely understood English, and yet he too prayed to ask Christ into his life. Will these three be in Heaven as Christians? Only God knows. But I continue to share that I am a Christian, and even though I often stumble in my daily walk with God, and may offer a clumsy explaination of the way of salvation, I still at least give it a try. My mother told me of a former fellow PE teacher who was part of merciless kidding of my Christian views, who was influenced in some way to become a Christian. Far better to be an inept witness, than to make fun of someone else at least giving it a try.
posted on 07.23.2004 1:55 PM17
"The people responded to Jesus the way they did because"
a gift was thrust into there dead hands and they became alive to Christ.
"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Ephesians 2: 8,9
We are His workmanship. Our response is predestined.
"For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them."
Ephesians 2:10
posted on 07.23.2004 5:42 PM18
Gary, not sure what exactly you're trying to get at, but your statement is a litte narrow. Mya want to broaden it a bit.
posted on 07.23.2004 5:53 PM19
Patrick says
"First steps are always done in blind faith. You choose to follow God’s will even though you are not sure he exists. This is the “leap of faith”. The risk you have to take."
and Gary cites Ephesians 2: 8,9
"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
This Ephesians verse is quite beautiful and would appear to be one of the verses from scripture which underlies Patrick's observation. It seems to me to express a blindingly valid and incontrovertible point of view (at least, anyone who would attempt to deny it's truth can look forward to a lengthy bath in a metaphysical tar pit).
posted on 07.23.2004 6:37 PM20
Larry. One word: No. Not going to get into the details right now.
posted on 07.23.2004 8:29 PM21
Great post Joe!
Patrick: a wonderful posit on the "process" of truly coming to know of a devine creator.
Larry Lord: Is that really the same Larry of other posts speaking? Patrick's "leap of faith" is the same "greatest of inductive leaps" I was referring to in another post. Could it be you have temporarily turned the filter off and are hearing more than "crickets"?
Rob: that woman on the UT campus has got the teachings of Jesus 180 out of sync. Any type of sexual expression between a husband and wife is sacred; this woman must never have seriously read the Song of Soloman. I cannot imagine Jesus ever caring about what sexual activity a man and woman have had. The Jesus I think I know would care about the love and fidelity between the two, and the love the two collectively have for God. The sexual puritanism preached by some "evangelicals" turns a lot of people off. Nowhere is it found in scripture. It seems to have been started by Thomas Aquinas and his cohort.
Peter
posted on 07.23.2004 10:25 PM22
Joe,
I thought I had a fairly goog vocabulary coming out of medical school, that is, until I tuned into your blog. "Prolegomena" Stop making me open my dictionary every time you put up a new post. (only kidding)
By the way, I think because you are referring to a single thing here, it would be "prolegamenon".
Peter
posted on 07.23.2004 10:31 PM23
Patrick,
Why would you cease a belief (Christianity) because others weren't walking the walk? How could the actions of others change an internal/spiritual belief? Help me on this one. It is predictable isn't it, that many if not most people would not stay the path of Jesus even though they are "Christians". Let's face it, that's one hard road to travel. The song from Godspell says it all as pertains to how we should walk: "To see thee more clearly. To love thee more dearly. To follow thee more nearly."
I know it's hard, cause I fall on my face in one way or another every "day by day"!
Peter
posted on 07.23.2004 10:43 PM24
"Why would you cease a belief (Christianity) because others weren't walking the walk?"
It's not a question of my judging whether or not someone is living up to the standards of faith that they set for themselves.
It's that when you see self-described religious people proselytizing Christianity, and then later not even attempting to practice that faith, then you just can't give it much credibility. In a nutshell, it's like a used car salesman trying to sell me a car but admitting that they themselves would never want to drive it.
posted on 07.24.2004 12:57 AM25
'It's not a question of my judging whether or not someone is living up to the standards of faith that they set for themselves.'
I thought God set the standard. getting very close to moral relativism here...
posted on 07.24.2004 8:29 AM26
Patrick, The gospel is rather simple. Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, was buried, rose again from the dead according to the Scriptures and was seen of eyewitnesses.
Either that is true or it is not. The relative performance of other professing Christians in living a life under the Lordship of Christ is immaterial to the fundamental question.
Because, though you have your own personal anecdotal evidence, you must admit that both now and over the years there have been many, MANY people who HAVE lived a life of self-sacrifice, love and service for the name of Christ. What do you do with their witness?
Maybe. you just have hung with the wrong crowd.
posted on 07.24.2004 9:52 AM27
"Gary, not sure what exactly you're trying to get at"
Why did the Apostles respond positively to Christ's command to "follow Me"? Joe says, "because he is, well, you know, God. He is what our hearts have always been seeking."
Oh?
"There is none who seeks after God" Romans 3:11
If none seek after God, then why did they follow Him?
Jesus teaches us that "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:44
They responded to "follow Me" because they were drawn by the Father.
No evangelist ever saved a soul. It is the work of God alone. Accepting this fact precludes us from acting like crass salesman chalking up "sales" numbers.
posted on 07.24.2004 4:06 PM28
Ok, thatnks for explaining a little better. And I agree with you.
posted on 07.24.2004 6:19 PM29
Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort have a new show on TBN that I caught that is absolutely horrible.
(I actually don't watch TBN at all but seeing Kirk after years of not seeing him, made me pause)
The show is about evangelizing the unsaved by getting them to admit, within the first 5 minutes of meeting a person, that they are a thief, a liar, and an adulterer, all while using scripture, and preaching God to agnostics and atheists.
In my opinion, this show is an assult on Christianity to the very core. You have well meaning Christains who have zero clue about what it takes to avangelize and plant seeds. The only seeds this show plants is the seed of contempt for Christians. I liken the shows effectivness to placing a few Gideon Bibles in a sock and hitting people over the head with it.
I sincerely believe that to help the Holy Spirit change a person, a relationship needs to be formed first in order to make the greatest impact in a persons life. Remeber we are to bring the gosple it is the Holy Spirit that changes the heart. Not us.
I think David Marcoe said it best in regards to evangelism:
"However, that doesn't negate the serious flaw in how mainline evangelicals approach such things. The largest problem is that they fail to cultivate sincere and deep relationships, failing those bonds as more than mere opportunities for making the "sale."
posted on 07.24.2004 6:28 PM30
Heres the link to the show I mentioned
http://www.wayofthemaster.com/
posted on 07.24.2004 6:30 PM31
Gary,
Joe: Why did the Apostles respond positively to Christ's command to "follow Me"? Joe says, "because he is, well, you know, God. He is what our hearts have always been seeking."
Oh?
"There is none who seeks after God" Romans 3:11
If none seek after God, then why did they follow Him?
Good point. But Paul is quoting Psalm 14 which, in context, says "The fools says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" So is Paul saying that no one in his heart believes in God?
posted on 07.24.2004 7:04 PM32
Steve in Corona says:
"Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, .....
Either that is true or it is not...
...you must admit that both now and over the years there have been many, MANY people who HAVE lived a life of self-sacrifice, love and service for the name of Christ. What do you do with their witness?
...Maybe. you just have hung with the wrong crowd."
You are correct. Even though I accept many of the teachings of the gospels, I don't accept Jesus as the Christ so I'm not a Christian.
But we are talking about what initially draws or drives away a "seeker" to Christianity. A persons experience of a religion will always be heavily influenced by the behavior of first people they meet from that religion.
If the majority of Christians you meet don't take their faith seriously, then why should anyone else? (Other than God has his finger on the "smite" button)
As far as the "MANY people who HAVE lived a life of self-sacrifice", yes, I have been influenced by them, however, some were Christians, some were not.
It didn't seem to be a key ingredient of these people who are living moral and generous lives. It's something to consider. Do you think it's possible for a non-Christian to live a moral life?
posted on 07.24.2004 8:53 PM33
Joe,
For your amusement: to be saved by good works, you'd have to do one approximately every 6.83 seconds, if you're a typical unmarried man.
posted on 07.24.2004 8:57 PM34
Do you think it's possible for a non-Christian to live a moral life?
posted on 07.24.2004 9:15 PM