Is Friendship Evangelism Really God-Centered?

Several years ago a student explained that he was prohibited from teaching evangelism in his Sunday School class unless he taught Friendship Evangelism. In other words, he was told that he could not discuss how to share the gospel without affirming that a Christian must first have a friendship with another person prior to sharing the gospel.

That same student then admitted that when he looked for Friendship Evangelism in the Bible he could not find it—so he went ahead and taught what the Bible said about evangelism.

Was that not an interesting pickle for this Sunday School teacher to find himself in?

The core of the issue is as follows. The church leader requiring this student to teach the necessity of friendship prior to sharing the gospel was, in fact, placing a human friendship in the divine Order of Salvation (aka. Ordo Salutis). However, when one studies the Order of Salvation, a long fought over concept for the Protestant Reformers, nowhere is there included in it the need for human friendship. In fact, requiring human friendship effectively injects a man-centered addition into the Ordo Salutis.

The Reformers, for their part, were protesting the man-centered additions of Catholicism, the Sacraments, priests, the Pope, Mary, the saints, Holy Water, and other add-ons into the Order of Salvation. Luther’s focus on Sola Scriptura (Scriptures alone) made God’s Word the only intermediary between God and the soul of man. It is through the very words of the Bible that the Holy Spirit works to bring men to justification and sanctification. The Holy Spirit works in, with, and by the Word of God. Yes, Jesus is the one and only Mediator between God and man. And this mediation is explained in, with, and by the gospel proclaimed.

The Christian, through evangelism, becomes a spokesperson for God by communicating the message of the Scriptures. Nothing should be added to this message and nothing subtracted from it. The gospel must-needs remain pure and unadulterated.

However, in recent generations it seems like we have re-injected a human addition into the salvation process by requiring friendship first.

This man-centered approach was taught by Joseph Aldrich in Life-Style Evangelism in the early 1980s. He used Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs” as the basis for his approach to evangelism.

“I have used Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs for years as a teaching tool. I find it helpful in determining what level of need a person is struggling to satisfy. Motivation to act appears to be directly related to need. If I can link a solution (the Gospel) to a felt need, I have created a favorable climate to meet that need. … Maslow’s model also lets us see how important genuine Christian fellowship can be as it is specifically targeted to meet these needs.” (pages 90, 94)

So armed with Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs” Aldrich came to the decision that proclamational evangelism was no longer the most useful methodology:

“Although the proclamational approach to evangelism will have validity until Jesus comes, it is not a means by which the majority of Christians will reach their own private world.” (page 78)

Apparently, the words of Jesus to “This gospel of the kingdom will be preached unto the whole world as a witness” (Matt 24:14), or “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15), or “repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations” (Luke 24:47) do not fit the paradigm of Abraham Maslow.

So who wins? Maslow or Jesus? Aldrich or Jesus?

A generation later Steve Sjogren of Conspiracy of Kindness taught people to do “Acts of Kindness,” borrowing his thinking from a paradigm similar to that of Aldrich. Again a man-centered approach built on secular psychological foundations. Here is what Steve Sjogren, Dave Ping, and Doug Pollock wrote in their 2004 book, Irresistible Evangelism:

“Many Christians talk about developing an intimate personal relationship with God, but the message they present to not-yet-Christians focuses almost exclusively on explaining how the atoning death of Jesus satisfies the requirements of God’s justice. … Talking about doctrines such as justification by faith and atonement by the substitutionary death of Jesus is usually unnecessarily confusing.

“…Relationship is the true heart of the matter. … Following Jesus is more than just a handy way to gain admittance into heaven or to avoid hell. It’s more than a magic formula for salvation.” (page 149)

So, according to Sjogren, Ping, and Pollock, talking about justification by faith is “unnecessarily confusing”! What of the book of Romans? Consider the great words of Paul in Romans 1:16-17:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "The just shall live by faith.” (Rom 1:16-17)

Again who wins? The Apostle Paul or Sjogren, Ping, and Pollock?

This author commends Paul and Jesus. Similarly, Luther’s concept of Sola Scriptura provides a helpful foundation for evaluating methodologies of evangelism.

We live in a day of Young, Restless, and Reformed, for which I am very grateful. In that light, it is quite odd that such a man-centered approach to evangelism prevails. Ours ought to be a Bible-centered approach to evangelism. And if our approach to evangelism is truly Word-centered, then it will automatically be God glorifying and Christ-focused.

For example, there are 52 personal evangelism conversations in the Gospels and the Book of Acts. The Greek verb “evangelize” is found in the New Testament 54, 55, or 56 times, depending on which Greek text-type one is using. There are literally 149 biblical verbs and 20 nouns that explain what evangelism is. Surely, God has not left Himself without a witness.

In fact, adding a human relationship to the order of salvation makes our efforts at building a friendship the reason for the election or predestination of the person with whom we are seeking to build a friendship. The issue does not become their acceptance or rejection of the gospel, but rather our efforts in building a relationship. Inversely, our failure to build a proper friendship then becomes the reason that our would-be-friend is consigned to hell, not their rejection of the gospel. Therefore, through Friendship Evangelism, the Enemy lays a guilt-trip on the evangelizing Christian for the eternal salvation of those he does not properly befriend before evangelizing. Quite a Catch-22!

The example of Jesus shows that proximity does not predestine or elect people. In fact, rather the opposite:

“Then He went out from there and came to His own country, and His disciples followed Him. And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue. And many hearing Him were astonished, saying, ‘Where did this Man get these things? And what wisdom is this which is given to Him, that such mighty works are performed by His hands! Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?’ And they were offended at Him. But Jesus said to them, ‘A prophet is not without honor except in his own country, among his own relatives, and in his own house.’ Now He could do no mighty work there, except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them. And He marveled because of their unbelief. (Mar 6:1-6 NKJ)

In this case the people of Nazareth (1) were astonished at Jesus and (2) were offended by Him, and (3) Jesus marveled because of their unbelief. Proximity to Jesus was not helpful. So also with the towns were Jesus ministered:

“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be brought down to Hades” (Luke 10:13-15)

In the case of Jesus, Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum were the cities were Jesus accomplished much of His ministry. Proximity to Jesus and experience of His teaching and miracles did not cause them to be more open to the gospel, but rather it was a cause for Jesus calling for their judgment!

Yes, nature abhors a vacuum. If we take God out of the equation, then we put ourselves into it. It is dangerous to build on any other foundation than that of the Word of God. The following words of Christ make sense in light of the dangers of competing views of evangelism:

“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock. But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.” (Matt 7:24-27)

Simeon Stylites and History as Catechism

An ascetic Syrian monk living in the 4^th and 5^th Centuries has captured the minds of students of church history for a number of years. Simeon Stylites (A.D. 390-459) appears to have desired the life of a hermit. Being bothered by people coming to him for prayers, he retreated to the top of an abandoned column in the ruins of Telanissa, Syria. This column was 9 feet tall. However, due to frequent interruptions Simeon was unable to adequately continue his austerities. So he retreated to the top of a 50-foot column, living on a small platform at the top. From this station he continually repeated prayers.

Simeon lived on a pillar for 37 years, and became quite an attraction. Over time a wall was erected around his pillar so that people would not disturb him; the wall allowed Simeon to continue his “prayerful contemplations.” His life and asceticism came to the attention of Roman Emperors Theodosius II and Leo I, as well as Genevieve of Paris. After his death Simeon was commemorated as a “Saint” successively by four church bodies, the Egyptian Coptic Orthodox Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Eastern Catholic Church, and the Roman Catholic Church.

What is curious about the story of Simeon Stylites is that it continues to be retold as a part of Church History One with little or no biblical analysis. To the modern Evangelical reader his story seems like it comes from a different world. The retelling of his story, and that of other ascetic monks like the Western Hermit Benedict of Nursia (A.D. 480-543) form a fitting sandbox for adapting the teaching of history into catechetics—a teaching tool to modify the values of the learner.

While the lives of hundreds of evangelists who lived and ministered in the first five centuries are lost in the sands of time, these two ascetic monks were raised to sainthood by the various state churches. The life of Simeon was inscribed by one his disciples, the monk Antonius; and Pope Gregory I wrote about the life of Benedict. The lives of both of these men exemplify a readjustment of focus in Early Church evangelism, missions, salvation, and spiritual life. The ministry of Simeon Stylites and Benedict of Nursia serves to reshape the doctrinal positions of students of history on several fronts:

1. A redefinition of true Christian spirituality
2. A refocusing away from the Great Commission
3. Advancing the inadequacy of the Bible to properly interpret history
4. The need for subservience to the state-church’s decrees

This article will address each of these concerns, and provide an Evangelical response to the subtle realignment suggested through their uncritical inclusion in church histories.

As far as redefining Christian spirituality, a focus on these cenobitic monks (relationally separate from the world) diverges from the 62 “one another” commands of the New Testament. The most conspicuous of these “one another” commands is the command to “love one another.” It is found listed three times in John 13:

“A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34-35)

All 62 of these “one another” commands can only be lived out with other Christians within the context of the local church. Therefore, obedience to these commands cannot be lived out through the ascetic isolation of the life of a hermit.

Further, true biblical spirituality does not consist of physical asceticism, as taught by Paul:

“Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—‘Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,’ which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.” (Col 2:20-23)

Rather Paul warned that a time would come when asceticism would replace true Christianity:

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.” (1 Tim 4:1-3)

So, a “history as catechism” teaches and the titles of “saint” promulgate, the lives of Simeon Stylites and Benedict of Nursia are examples of a holy life. But their examples do not follow New Testament norms.

Then follows another tragedy, a refocus away from the Great Commission. A focus on the lives of these two hermits glamorizes their privatized, personalized, and individualized-approach to spirituality. Instead of this type of self-oriented spirituality Christ put a message in the mouths of His followers. He gave us the gospel along the command to go into the whole world with that message:

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.’” (Mark 16:15)

“Then He said to them, ‘Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.’” (Luke 24:46-47)

True spirituality is never focused for one’s own benefit or to one’s own glory. True spirituality is focused outwardly toward others with the gospel of Christ to the glory of Christ. And Christ never commanded His followers to live an ascetic life. Rather, He reframed the argument between the Stoics and Epicureans by replacing it with justification by grace alone and through faith alone.

A third unfortunate result of focusing on the spirituality of these hermits is the perception that the Bible is inadequate for properly interpreting history. Rather, for the Evangelical, the Bible must remain the interpretive lens through which all of life is analyzed and understood—including church history. The words of God’s Word provide the worldview through which the world is to be analyzed:

“And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. … You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.” (Deut 6:6-8)

Jesus said:

“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock. But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.” (Matt 7:24-27)

Yet, enter these ascetics with the accolades of territorial church’s “sainthood,” and what happens to the teachings of the New Testament? The clear teachings of the Bible contradict these lifestyles as exemplary on a number of levels. So, when they are taught as good examples without being properly vetted through the Bible’s doctrine and practice, the student of history is left with a non sequetor. In order to accept these men as valid “holy” men, he must disengage his view of spirituality as taught in the pages of the Bible.

To reconcile this obvious non sequetor, the student of history must surmise that a different set of criteria are needed for interpreting Early Church spirituality. The student is made to engage in mental historical-criticism and to relinquish his present experience and understanding of life and posit a fairytale where the Bible is no longer the foundation of all truth.

The salty historian has the student right were he wants him, in a state of ambivalence. Now the scholar provides his pupil with an answer. To properly interpret Early Church history, one must find it in and through (1) an authoritative Church, (2) Its authoritative decrees (canonizations of saints), and (3) Its authoritative Creeds. The authority and inerrancy of the Scriptures are replaced with an authoritative Church and its inerrant history.

Finally then, the Evangelical student of history is left to interpretations of history hand-selected to provide him catechetical training. His congregational view of the church is not considered. His view of the Great Commission is never addressed. Evangelism and justification by faith are lost in the rhetoric of the Trinitarian and Christological controversies. In this fourth step, the student is asked to submit his mind to the state-church’s affirmation that these ascetics we really “saints” and lived exemplary lives. He may never consider why they are included in histories or why they are lifted up as examples.

Sola Scriptura is lost in these last two transactions. The Evangelical student of history may not realize that his newfound historical-critical insight, if unchecked, will eventually impale his Evangelical view of salvation. More historical catechetics are still to come. Simeon Stylites and Benedict of Nursia are only an appetizer. Church History One is filled with delectables to disengage the mind of the student of history from New Testament doctrines, creating a distant world far removed from the possibility of analysis through Scripture!

“But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:14-15)

Lessons from a Chronological Bibliography of Evangelism

I recently updated a bibliography on the topic of evangelism that I have been nursing for 30+ years. It consists of a chronological bibliography that lists books by the year they were published. The list includes 750+ entries from A.D. 1523 to 2016. This study has caused me to notice several patterns.

#1 Only Those Who Write and Are Published Are Remembered

Perhaps this statement begs the question. My study is based on books that have been written in the past. Therefore the statement involves circular reasoning. Even so, it is only or primarily those who publish who will be remembered after they pass away. If the Lord allows us to leave a continued legacy beyond our lives (humanly-speaking), it is often directly proportional to our opportunity or privilege to write down what we have learned. While Proverbs 19:10 is true, “When there are many words, transgression is unavoidable,” it is also true that words are necessary for teaching. There is a necessity for teachers to write for the benefit and training of others.

At the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary alumni gathering at the Evangelical Theological Society meeting last year, President Al Mohler firmly exhorted his alumni to make it a priority to write. It was a great admonition! Writing is time consuming and very difficult. And yet writing is a necessary spiritual discipline for those honored with the biblical title of “Teacher.”

This study is limited to gleaning insights based on past writings. It checks trends and movements based on books that were published of which I am familiar.

#2 Reformed Publishers Tend to Focus Primarily on Doctrinal Works

When perusing the catalogs of Reformed publishing houses, I noted an interesting tendency. They focus first on doctrinal books and second on methodological works. This emphasis displays a “horse and carriage”-type distinction.

It seems that for these publishers the doctrinal priority is of primary importance—since good doctrine always leads to good practice. However, the inverse is not necessarily the case. Apparently “good” practice or pragmatism does not always work its way back into “good” doctrine. In fact, most bad doctrine comes from unbiblical practices reorienting doctrinal viewpoints. Sound biblical doctrine must always inform practice and not visa-versa.

Doctrine is the horse, and practice is the carriage.

#3 Specific Patterns Became Evident in a Chronological Bibliography

While most bibliographies are alphabetical (organized by author from A-Z), chronological bibliographies (organized by year of publication) reveal waves, patterns, and trends. In Ephesians 4:14 Paul spoke of “winds of doctrine.” As the “Horse of History” passes by, movements and fads gain buoyancy and then submerge. Six trends become noticeable when studying a chronological bibliography of writings on evangelism.

• 1820-1960s: A revivalist trend began in 1820, gathered momentum in the early 20^th Century, and then slowly lost steam in the 1960s. There are a number of books in this long wave of publication.
• 1960s to today: A.B. Bruce’s Training of the Twelve (1872) and John Darby’s translating of Matthew 28 as “make disciples” (1884) fed a 20^th Century discipleship movement. The ministry of Dawson Trotman, founder of the Navigators  in 1933 electrified this movement. Upon Trotman’s death in 1956, Robert Coleman became its de facto leader after he authored The Master Plan of Evangelism (1963).
• 1960s-1990s: As the above mentioned revivalism waned, personal evangelism began to swell. Its programmatic emphasis on personal evangelism grew in the 1960s and continued through the 1990s. Publications in this wave included “The Four Spiritual Laws,” Evangelism Explosion, and Continuous Witness Training.
• 1970s-1980s: As personal evangelism took hold in one generation, the next generation rejected its confrontational elements. A new pattern of publications emerged, focused on lifestyle and friendship evangelism.
• 1990s to the present: Piggy-backing on the tenets of lifestyle evangelism, the servant evangelism wave grew when Steve Sjogren authored Conspiracy of Kindness (1993). This trend continues to merge its strength with friendship evangelism in an intersecting wave pattern.
• 1990s to the present: Meanwhile a new approach to sharing the gospel emerged: gospel-storying. Storying, while having its roots in the 1970s, gathered momentum after Leighton Ford wrote The Power of Story (1994). Since that time Storying has found its champions in academia, missions circles, and local church evangelism strategies.

Often the lines of demarcation between wave patterns are somewhat blurry. Solomon reminded his readers in Ecclesiastes, “there is nothing new under the sun” (Eccl 1:9). While some waves overtake and consume prior waves, some waves combine to develop greater swells. Once a new wave saturates the church culture, its approach often becomes the new norm.

It appears that the doctrinal validity of a new practice is only minimally questioned at first—since practice is only loosely tied to doctrine. When a wave is found doctrinally wanting, some authors recondition it or baptize it riding its wave with more solid doctrinal underpinnings. Herein is the complexity of teaching in the area of Practical Theology—methodologies are constantly being invented, advanced, and repackaged.

Waves are not bad in and of themselves. However, we who seek to be obedient to Christ must to remain faithful to His written revelation in the Bible. This faithfulness is necessary both in doctrine and practice. And as mentioned above, doctrine is the horse and practice is the carriage. Right doctrine must always trump pragmatism. Practice must remain subservient to good theology.

Jesus warned His disciples, as He prepared them to go out on an evangelism mission trip:

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” (Matt 10:16)

According to Christ the first need of His disciples was an uncanny wisdom. Then, that wisdom needed to be harnessed to His second admonition, the maintaining of an innocent, harmless, and gentle spirit.

So as multiple waves of evangelism methodology spill over American Evangelicalism, right doctrine will steady the ship of the church—which is why I am grateful for the current focus on Puritan theology. As right doctrine is applied to practice, the ship will arrive at its proper destination:

“And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” (Eph 4:11-14)

[FYI: A Chronological Bibliography can be viewed on pages 25-39 of this resource: http://www.evangelismunlimited.com/documents/evangelizology/evangelizology-2014-chapter-01.pdf]