http://ichthys.com/ 
Believers in the World XXVII

Question #1:  
Thank you, Dr. L. 

Enjoyed reading many of your Q&A's today while sitting in my car waiting. Very Biblical, just as it should be. Will be reading more in the future (bookmarked). 

God bless.
Response #1:   
Thanks for the good words!
Question #2: 
You know Doc, I've been thinking on something. I know you might not personally think this is a big deal, but I believe it's a pretty significant issue (you'll see what I mean).

Christians often insist copyright law, even people who agree it's far from clean, must be followed no matter what because the Bible says God wants us to follow the law of the land, that governments still enforce order and you're disobeying God, in effect, because He ordains them and this law doesn't forbid us following His will. On the principle behind this, i would agree. However...

You positively are NOT honoring God if you insist these laws have to be followed as a moral command.

Think about it, these companies insist you don't own something you bought with your own hard earned money, and they do in fact steal it back (a form of fraud/scamming that anyone in their right mind would be outraged by with and rightly see as criminal behavior that cannot be justified or let slide with anything that's not media and say you shouldn't let yourself be stolen from/tell others they should let it happen), and justify it by "you agreed", "It's our legal right to use our products in such a way". Now I'm not saying take something currently being paid for, obviously that's not right regardless, but insisting God orders us to see torrenting something they've abandoned and have no interest in using anymore as a moral violation because "they technically still own it, and we must follow the law of the land!", is basically just justifying their sin, and in the name of God as well! Worse, it effectively does, in fact, insist you violate the principle of "only disobey laws that forbid you from what God says/order something morally wrong".

They're telling people, who see how hypocritical this all is, and how much they clearly see this as justifying an exception to being a scam and being stolen from, that THEY'RE hypocrites because "God says render unto Caesar what is his, end of story". They are not only projecting (lying to yourself and others), but engaging in the kind of hypocrisy Paul and Jesus would rebuke because you approve of, and endorse the sin of a group rendering unto themselves what is not theirs by any reasonable standard, insist they can have just about any standard with things they no longer will even use, or their currently used things, no matter how hypocritical they are, and tell people to let themselves be stolen from and obey this predatory behavior without question. In effect, they are committing the same sin these corporations do in denying you're subject to the basic morality of not trying to convince people some vile act of criminal behavior, done in the same way and without any nuance as it would be without being legal, must be obeyed because some fat cat lobbys for a bill that says it's magically not that. It is NOT a "rendering unto Caesar" issue because as I said, in literally any other context this behavior would be seen as wholly criminal, and seen as there being no way to justify it, much less make excuses as for why you shouldn't speak up against it.

It doesn't really matter if they don't approve of said behavior at that point, they are willfully denying the reality of the situation, and more or less shouting at others to do the same, that they're decieving themselves for not until they capitulate. There are a lot of times when we do have to obey the law even if we disagree. That ends when you have to be a hypocrite and deceiver yourself to do so.
Response #2:  
I wouldn't exercise myself about it. This is a matter of individual application. In such things, we should each do what the Spirit is leading us to do. Lecturing other believers on points of application which are not critical is certainly not appropriate (Romans chapter 14).

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #3:  
I'm sorry if my words were harsh. I just felt this was an issue that needed correcting, and I have a bad habit of getting overly emotional with that.

I also got flustered because I got in a debate with someone over this(who was claiming "you're just trying to justify theft" no matter how i explained the situation), and they more or less ignored anything i said in favor of "you agreed to whatever Terms Of Service, idiot, you're bound for life, period. You can'tjust lie by turning back on that"(!?), and justify doubling and tripling down that "this is ignoring logic for your own agenda" when when i pointed out how his argument is literally circular.

It got to a point even I realized he won't listen to reason, why he acted in such a way i couldn't know. I need to learn to not let myself get so upset over issues like this(no matter how stupid, or stubborn someone is being). I guess I need to learn when to stop trying to convince someone too.
Response #3:
Re: "I need to learn to not let myself get so upset over issues like this (no matter how stupid, or stubborn someone is being)." I would say, especially when someone is being stupid or stubborn. That is probably just the devil baiting you in.

Re: "I need to learn when to stop trying to convince someone too." People who are interested in the truth can be instructed; people who are conflicted about the truth can sometimes be helped; people who are antagonistic to the truth are the swine who trample those who proffer them pearls.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #4:  
Doc someone told me online in response to a post asking if a certain role-playing behavior I did in a game was wrong, that I should "take it more seriously".

Most Christians today are unaware of the fact that prior to this modern era with video games, the occultists used a similar role playing practice to pathwork for their mental archetypes for manifestation through narratives of identit , or to engage with the godforms or deities which they would call upon, all of it was a mental visualisation or story which would create neural memory pathways, which then your mind would recall the reference unconsciously.. 

They would use the form of fictional stories , myths , to create archetypes or “heroes”, (godforms) and spread these thought forms among many people , and once people had a collective meme or reference, their mind was dialled into the particular vibe of the magician/author, this would then make then manipulative through the unconscious aspirations they absorbed via empathy and idealisations.

Television as well as videogames build these unconscious pathways via dissociation, in the occult they use this purposely to send archetypes to the subconscious to mold the identity of the practitioner, the occultists in Hollywood (a druids staff) use this to terraform the individuals for the spirit they wish to evoke into the consumers of their narratives.

This works via suspended belief, the way a game can make you empathize or cease empathy create neural pathways for future indifference or empathization with nonsensical agendas.

(For example a story presents someone mistreated because they lead an immoral life, and makes you empathize with them, this mechanism works to passively mold you. And it works better when you are “entertained” by these energies)

(I actively use this when gaming to respond to these attempts with the gospel where possible , referencing the biblical accounts of the patriarchs to exercise empathy through their paths, I’ve done it since I was a kid without knowing)

"Yes you may not go along with the agendas of the world, but if you walk through their narratives passively it make it less likely you will access an active influence from the scriptural answer via the spirit."

I responded saying it all sounds absurd, and granted I did misunderstand thinking he was saying never to engage on media entertainment, and he said this:

"No bro, did you read everything, There is a difference between passive absorption and being “entertained” by their agenda, and learning to be watchful with the Holy Spirit."

You maintain your Christian identity through whatever you see, just don’t absorb their narrative, 

When I watch movies I am conscious, when they have a homosexual boy get picked on in a wrong way and attempt to make you empathize with their narrative I am awake and conscious and can see it rather than passively absorb the assumptions and consequent emotions they want to program me with..

I can empathize but from a Christ centered perspective 

It’s not a case of be passive or inactive or don’t watch or do anything, we have identity in Christ and power

My mental world is under the Lordship of Jesus.

When I play video games , the same opportunity exists, when played tales of zestria for example, it’s a game where corruption is ruining the world and “hellions” are taking over people’s minds..

I saw that as the Asian cultures understanding of the unseen realm, and what is taking place on the world, and they remembered much more than the west, 

when in the game, they go and pray to the goddess I see that as what they do, in that culture, and understand that’s their story version of what to do,

I understand that no saints or angels should be prayed too, I see that as their cultural belief, just as when I go to those countries as I have this same belief exists, however the path meditation of the game playing allows me to see how I would respond as a believer, with a Superior way to change the atmosphere..

As a Christian I understand the principles are their interpretation of how spiritual things actually work, for example a land can be corrupted , because of the people just like the game displayed, the hellion correspond to the shedim, (read dr Michael Heisers book the unseen realm and or do a Bible study on ancient Israel and first century Christianity cosmological understanding) these things motivate me to more research and wakefulness

You see what I’m saying, your mind will translate everything, if you maintain consciousness, it becomes default after a while

If I were to watch Harry Potter, I have not, but if I did , it wouldn’t be as the church groups I know of that watch it do, it would be conscious, I would see the projection of the authors worldview and the agenda which has made people romanticise witchcraft, but also I would notice it as their search for power to change circumstance as well as the need for recognition of the power the biblical heroes had by the anointing of Gods spirit upon them, it’s not either consume it and think it’s good or be afraid of it, this comes with Christian maturity
(The author was into the occult and is without Christ , this is known, passively absorbing these stories places them in your unconscious and the stories become energy archetypes for possible behavior via narrative empathy)".

To me this sounds very unbiblical of an idea, almost as occult as the idea he claims is an issue here. Am I right on this?
Response #4:  
This person doesn't know you so has no idea of your "level of consciousness" when you see or do something. 

It seems to me to be a bit of rationalizing to say, "Yes, I watch porn, but with consciousness of its dangers and wrongness" etc. If something is wrong to do, it's wrong to do. If correspondent were being tortured in a prison camp and being forced to watch whatever, then fighting against it in such a way would be legitimate. Absent some strange situation like that, Christians shouldn't do things the Spirit is telling them not to do.

There are, as mentioned many times, plenty of things in this culture which are "gray area" where maybe you have no problem doing "it" but maybe it does cause me problems or vice versa (read Romans chapter fourteen). Our duty as Christians is to try to please the Lord, listen to the Spirit not the flesh, and do all we can to avoid giving offense to our brothers and sisters in Christ, either by doing things that offend them when that is unnecessary or by castigating them for doing things that offend us when such things are not sinful in and of themselves.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #5:  
Hello Dr. Luginbill!

Thank you for the rapid help; I’ve been simmering a while on this. 

Hopefully, you, yours, and the ministry are doing well; let me know if you’ve any particular prayer requests!

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason why you are facing this issue now is because you were overly forthcoming on a previous set of forms, right?"

Yes. I empathize with your dental form example; since this whole incident, I lean much more towards “need to know” now. 

Thankfully, they’ve thought I was fine; it was more my trying to distinguish what was actually an issue or not since it’s so subjective, I should focus more on that piece, thank you for that. 

"You've already been cleared . . ." That’s the kicker to it all; the doctors think I’m fine, I just have to prove it to non-medical staff that’s wanting my whole medical history with spooky warnings if I’m not honest. 

I was a mess when I was younger, and later stuck in some legalistic nonsense, but I want to keep moving forward in the newness of Christ. 

I don’t know how other people do it regarding messy pasts, but hopefully I should focus on the truth about the Lord - who He is, His perfection, Sovereignty, and the plan He’s enacted and orchestrated - also, on who Christ calls me to be, what He has for me, the truths about this Christian life.

That’s one of the wonderful things about having Scripture - it outlines for me the many aspects of who I am, or can be, within God’s plan.

Despite my messy, sinful and stupid past, the Lord graciously preserved me, and kept me from total ruin, and He truly made me a different person.

I think that whole form wanting a data dump on my life left me questioning if I need to divulge past things and also some self-reflection on if they still matter or define me - and frankly I can’t retroactively get diagnosed too easily even if I wanted. 

My understanding from a relative with a medical career history seems to be if doctors don’t have verifiably on paper that you are XYZ, then for all sakes and purposes you aren’t or don’t have “it”.

For better or worse, I haven’t been reporting different things, and I don’t want to believe I have this obligation to share my life’s private details because someone in authority wants it. 

For example, I know I’m real persnickety, and could maybe have some psychotherapist say I’m “OCD”, but you know what? By the power of God, I am able to choose to not be led by fear and fall into the label pit of defeat so why go down that route? 

Anyhow, that is my mess - wanting to obey God’s directive to submit to authorities, but not wanting to be a martyr or more incapacitated. 

Have a wonderful day, sir, and thank you for hearing out this matter. I imagine it could seem trite, but it seems to have some bigger “bones” I’ve circled for a while in it. 

PS I did just get word from a relative with medical career history that despite the name “health history” it is really just notable alterations to the body and ongoing current conditions/treatment. That will be a big help in discerning!
Response #5:   
That is really good to know indeed! In other words it's not like filling out some national security form if you're trying to join the CIA or something – the doctors just want to know what's up with you and what they should be aware of in prescribing and diagnosing, e.g. So, re: "I don’t want to believe I have this obligation to share my life’s private details because someone in authority wants it.", Amen to that! After all, how do you prove something medical to non-medical people? You get a doctor's note! They are the experts, after all.

Regarding "being a mess" before being saved and before moving forward spiritually, there may be some small number in Christ's Church who don't have that testimony, but I've not met one yet. The Lord is the only One who can deliver us from our respective "messes". That is why Paul tells us to let the bad past go (Phil.3:13), and move on instead with living the present for Jesus Christ (Phil.1:21), as we look forward to an indescribably wonderful future.
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.
Philippians 3:20-21 NKJV
Keeping you in my prayers, my friend.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #6:  
Hi Dr. Luginbill,

I’ll see where the matters shakes out; Lord willing, I’ll be able to share a praise with you in due time. 

Thank you for this ministry; it really is a bit of a barren waste land out there at times, and I don’t want to take this for granted!
Response #6:  
Thanks for the update and for the good words!

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #7:  
I hope you are doing well. I just wanted to say hello. It's been a while, but we are following and enjoying learning from all of your offerings every day. Many thanks!

On this end, both of us are plugging along OK, dealing with the usual ongoing "light afflictions". I hope you are healed up well and still in one piece too, after your unfortunate trip while jogging? The suffering that we go through in this present time is not worthy to be compared with the glory that is coming on the near horizon (Rom. 8:18). It is a weary battle sometimes, though blessedly for some of us it's not too intense every day. I appreciate those calmer days. Fortunately, God is ever present to see us through whatever fight is pressing on us, physically, mentally, or spiritually.

l appreciate all of the work that you are doing for our Lord, to keep and encourage us in the fight, and away from any pitfalls, while we are earnestly contending for the faith, against all enemies. It will all be OK, now and when we safely get to the other side, great beyond anything we can imagine. Praying that God will supply your every need in the meantime. Wishing you a good restful break ahead and a happy Thanksgiving. God is good, and we will always be thankful to Him for His Providence every day! Have a good one, Bob!

Your friend in Jesus,
Response #7:   
Thanks for the email! I have been wondering about you and your health, and __'s too.

I'm doing OK. Semester is winding down. Lots on the "to do" list once it does finish out, but at least the coming week promises to be restful.

Ankle(s) doing better, and I'm about over the horrible food poisoning I got a week ago (last Monday was the hardest teaching day I can remember as a result).

Thanks for the good words and godly perspectives, my friend! Important things for us all to keep in mind.

I wish you both a wonderful Thanksgiving!

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #8:  
Happy thanksgiving. Still here learning about Jesus from a great believer. 

Love brother

Thank you!
Response #8:  
Wishing you and your family a blessed Thanksgiving too.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #9:  
Doc, something I conflated for the longest time and was in a kind of living nightmare I thought I wasn't even allowed to escape/want freedom from because of that, was self-pity and bringing your burdens and pain before God. Self-pity, it should be obvious, is a sin. It's the Jonah classic as I like to call it, thinking "Why me? Why do I have to be the one who goes through this and not some more deserving person/one who's strong enough to take it?" It's complaining about your situation, and not even because it's truly unjust or cruel. It's because things didn't go the way YOU would have liked, and you feel "why can't I be the one who got this better thing/role/situation?" You feel so offended and violated by the injustice, perceived or not, that you stew in the situation and emotions to make yourself feel better, "I deserved much better, I'll get it yet! It's not MY fault this happened after all!"

Bringing your sorrows to God is inherently the opposite. You know the situation can be hard, and even undeserved, but God understands your pain and wants you to have peace and joy in the midst of it. Things like this may be for your own good, but He understands how that feels. Jesus Himself walked and lived as we did, even dying the worst death anyone ever has or will out of love for us. I guess for a long time (and I still am being led through recovery from this abuse, trauma and all that put this in me) I had a very warped idea of God. One who was distant in our suffering, just telling us "you can pull through, you're strong!", one who shames us for "pitying yourself with your desire for comfort? Who are you to speak against this!? This is for your own good!", ect., ect.

I ask you pray I'll be fully freed from this as well. God is still revealing false ideas I had of Him, and I'm learning to give Him, and thus myself time, to trust in His timing with this and not make things worse by trying to rush it.
Response #9:   
Thank you for this, my friend. I am very pleased to see how much you've grown and how far you have progressed in spiritual growth over the years – as this email in particular demonstrates. 

I do and will continue to be praying for you, my friend, for this and all other things. 

No resting on the laurels! Keep pushing forward.
(12) [It is] not that I have already gotten [what I am striving for], nor that I have already completed [my course]. Rather, I am continuing to pursue [the prize] in hopes of fully acquiring it – [this prize for whose acquisition] I was myself acquired by Christ Jesus. (13) Brethren, I do not consider that I have already acquired it. This one thing only [do I keep in mind]. Forgetting what lies behind me [on the course] and straining towards the [course] ahead, (14) I continue to drive straight for the tape, towards the prize to which God has called us from the beginning [of our race] in Christ Jesus. (15) So as many as are [spiritually] mature, let us have this attitude (i.e., of focusing on our spiritual advance and reward and not getting hung up on what lies behind: vv.13-14), and if in any matter your attitude is off-center, God will reveal that to you (i.e., assuming you are mature and are advancing as you should). (16) But with respect to the progress you have made, keep on advancing in the same way!
Philippians 3:12-16
Wishing you and your family a blessed and happy Thanksgiving!

In Jesus Christ our Lord,

Bob L.
p.s., Hebrews chapter 10 coming this Saturday! [now posted at the link]
Question #10:  
Good morning Doctor.

I always say, if the earliest you can trace an idea or belief/doctrine is to some pagan religion and/or occult teaching, that should be an immediate and major red flag, especially when it's attempted to make "ok" by mixing with Biblical doctrine and ideals. Many people seem to do this without even knowing it's origin. This is part of why, I believe, Scripture says to "test all things", as Gnostics did the same.

You agree with this I'd assume? What's your take on this?
Response #10:   
Testing all teachings is important, and the number one way to do so is to discern whether or not it is in the Bible . . . at all. If it is, then associations real or perceived are of minimal import. Christmas trees may have pagan origins, e.g., but they're not in the Bible – as Christmas as a "holiday" is not either – so why worry about this? If some teaching or ritual or fad is not prescribed in scripture, then, even if it's being ballyhooed by the church-visible, we don't have to worry about it (e.g., water-baptism, discipleship, etc.) – in fact instead we should give it a wide berth.

Hope you had a good Thanksgiving!

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #11:  
Doc, something I feel I struggle with is thinking in extreme black and white. I am autistic and a common struggle with that is thinking in black and white where it's anything but something that applies to.

Because I grew up like that, I ended up with an idea of God who's, more or less, entirely deterministic. If He's perfect in all ways, knows all, and is capable of anything, what room is there for any nuance?

It's a mindset that caused me much suffering and harm to myself over the years. One example is accepting He forgives me, but then trying way too hard to just...forcibly avoid an issue again. Either that or "trust Him" with a sin issue by force, and neither actually worked. I was essentially just paying lip service to being forgiven but never truly accepting that I'm cleaned, trying to "prove" my repentance to myself and others via works, thinking of confession and forgiveness as some intense juggling act that needs my constant effort to "maintain repentance/avoid feeling guilt and shame after the fact". It only made things worse.

If you're willing, pray over this. I still don't understand how this would be applied, but I know patience is key in all things.
Response #11:   
Many people have this "hyper-scrupulous" problem. Speaking of extremes, somewhere between thinking that things which are matters of application are absolute (this problem you mention), and thinking that they are all completely relative (so that there is in essence no truth), is the "sweet spot" of correct application.

God IS perfect. Learning how to apply that truth is the issue. Regarding what you mention, since Jesus died for all sin, how is it not perfect to forgive sin based upon that perfect sacrifice? In fact, imagining that one is so bad that this forgiveness bought by our Lord a price beyond understanding does NOT apply, is actually wrong thinking, misapplication, and the height of arrogance. God is love. Only those who resist and rebel against Him put themselves beyond the pale of that love.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #12: 
Hi Mr. Luginbill,

Did you have a nice Thanksgiving Day?

Remember when I emailed you this summer with a couple short pieces to encourage others? Well, I am working on it again and I put together a page titled "How to be Saved".

Would you mind telling me if you think this is an accurate presentation of the Gospel? I have read yours and how you said it's better to keep it short - I want to make sure presenting the truth well. Here's what I put:

How to be Saved

For God so loved the world that He gave
His One and Only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but
have eternal life. – John 3:16

To be saved, all you must do is trust in Jesus – Who He is and what He
has done:

-Jesus is God’s Son, and also a true human (Philippians 2:5-8).

-Jesus died to pay for all the wrong you have done (Romans 5:8).

But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still
sinners, Christ died for us. – Romans 5:8

Trusting in Jesus is the only way to spend eternity with God when you die. With the sacrifice of Jesus, God has paid the price for all our wrong and is freely offering us a chance to spend forever with Him. Trust that what God has said about His Son is true.

Whoever has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. – John 3:33

When you trust in Jesus, the Bible says this about you:

We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know Him Who is true. And we are in Him Who is true by being in His Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. – 1 John 5:20

Respectfully,
Response #12:  
This is wonderful, my friend!

Would you mind if I posted it?

Our Thanksgiving was very nice (just about done with the leftovers, LOL). Hope yours was as well.

Keeping you in my prayers.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #13:  
I've been thinking, a lot of people rely on their own strength while thinking they're "obeying God". They have a twisted view of Him and the expectations put on a Believer that leads them to ask, "Lord, give me strength!", have empty "trust" they'll get through, then obsessively confess their sins and keep the cycle going. It's a destructive mindset that doesn't allow for true spiritual growth and more often than not (take my case), leads to despair because they think "everything must be my fault somehow! I must not want to repent!", etc.

I feel what these people need is to let go of trying to be "strong" and let God meet them where they are. In other words, they should ask God to give them the strength...to stop being TOO "strong" on their own, because that's not a house built on the rock, it's the house built on sand.
Response #13:
It's a good point.
And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
2nd Corinthians 12:9-10 KJV
Of course, we really can't generalize about people. Obsessive confession is a misapplication; so is not confessing at all. Asking God for faith is a misapplication because faith is in our hands and it grows as we grow; relying on self instead of God is also wrong. 

Very few of us have gone straight-line forward to perfect application. Even Paul said he hadn't yet "arrived" (Phil.3:12). The rest of us have bounced from one side of the road to the other even when diligently trying to progress. We are grateful for the forward distance we have made and for straightening out the line of progress over time – and that is what we pray for others as well. Getting serious about spiritual growth is the only way to do this, of course.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #14:  
Dr. Luginbill,

As you know, I am trying to teach the Gospel of Luke to my family. We are now in the 12th chapter and I am having problems understanding the following verses:

Luke 12 vs 35-48
"Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect."

Then Peter said to Him, "Lord, do You speak this parable only to us, or to all people?"

And the Lord said, "Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his master will make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season? Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. Truly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all that he has. But if that servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and be drunk, the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant who knew his master's will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.

First problem: I am not sure if the servants in this parable are all believers or a mixed group. I know the huge crowd surrounding them was a mixed group - some believed, most did not, and everything in between. But they must have at least been curious or they wouldn't be hanging around trying to hear what Jesus had to say. When Jesus was asked by Peter who He was talking to, He didn't directly answer the question. He instead launched into this story about a servant who has been doing what his master asked him to do during his absence (and will be rewarded) as opposed to a servant who rebelled against his master's instructions thinking that his master would be gone for quite a while and wouldn't find out about his misbehavior (and would be punished).

Because Jesus used the word "steward" or "servant", my first inclination was to say that all the servants in this parable were believers (servants of Christ), but when I got to verse 46 and read that the unfaithful servant was cut in two and appointed a portion with unbelievers, I thought that couldn't be describing a believer. That has to be describing either an apostate (who once believed but now does not), or one who has never been a believer. The fact that he is described as a servant made me think the former was true (an apostate), but the Old Testament also refers to "hired servants" and "indentured servants", some of whom are Israelites and some of whom are not. This makes me think that the word servant does not necessarily mean a person who has made a voluntary choice to serve the Master (Jesus). If that is true, then the unfaithful servant in this parable could just mean a hired servant who was an unbeliever doing what unbelievers do and therefore receiving the punishment that unbelievers have coming. Is Jesus saying to Peter, "I am talking to anyone who is listening, saying 'If the shoe fits, wear it', knowing that within that crowd were people from all across the spectrum - from unbelievers, to the curious, to the amazed people who have seen the miracles and heard the teaching and were on the edge of believing, to those who believed but lack assurance, all the way to those who believed the propaganda put out by the religious leaders that Jesus got His miraculous powers from Beelzebub (Satan) and had made a decision to reject Him as the Messiah? Is that Jesus' answer to Peter's question (if the shoe fits, wear it)? And how does that tie in to the next few verses?

Second problem: There are varying degrees of punishment being described here - many stripes versus few stripes. Is this describing discipline meted out in this life, or the degree of punishment while in Torments awaiting the Lake of Fire, or is it teaching that there are various degrees of punishment eternally in the Lake of Fire? I can find no scripture to support the last two options, and since condemnation is based upon lack of belief rather than sinful actions, I tend to think that all existence in the Lake of Fire will be equally horrible (not dogmatic about that). Ruling out those two options leaves only discipline meted out in this life. But experience tells me that is not the right answer either, because it seems that many unfaithful servants don't receive the appropriate discipline in this life (although appropriate discipline is not my job to determine, and in any case it could go unnoticed by me). So could you please help me understand the point that Jesus is trying to make with the "many stripes and few stripes" teaching?

Third problem: "To whom much is given, much will be required." Is Jesus referring to material things, or responsibilities, or opportunities, or knowledge, or all of the above? As a business owner that has employees, I do understand that additional responsibilities usually results in additional rewards and that an employee who accepts those additional responsibilities in anticipation of greater reward yet fails to fulfill those responsibilities is more likely to be fired than demoted. Because of that reality, some employees do not want to take on the additional responsibilities, content rather to forego potential rewards and remain in a position that they are comfortable with. I am sure that happens in the spiritual realm as well, deciding not to advance spiritually or engage in ministry so as to avoid the possibility of failing and being held responsible. Maybe that is laziness, maybe a fear of failure, or maybe lack of trust in the leading of the Holy Spirit, maybe a lack of commitment, but whatever the reason, it seems to result either in stripes (discipline) or lack of rewards. Am I understanding this teaching correctly? Would a person actually be better off not trying to engage in a ministry than to try and fail - foregoing potential rewards rather than facing the possibility of receiving stripes.

Thank you for your help. I don't want to teach anything incorrectly or incomplete, so I appreciate your assistance in this effort. May our Lord continue to bless you and your ministry. 

Sincerely,
Response #14:  
Always good to hear from you, my friend.

Re: "Is that Jesus' answer to Peter's question (if the shoe fits, wear it)?" Yes, I believe that is correct. This works for everyone. If a person is an unbeliever, that person needs first to believe, then to grow, then to commit to the faithfulness required to be ready for the Master's return. The second two steps are true of believers too.

Re: "And how does that tie in to the next few verses?" Everyone in Israel was supposed to be a believer. Israel in toto was "God's Servant" (cf. Is.41:8). So this works for everyone as well. Obviously, good servants are rewarded; bad ones are not. And who would behave as the bad servant does here and yet be a believer? If we are trying to parse things out for exceptions, well, the Bible doesn't have footnotes for a reason. Anyone who really WAS a believer yet performing in the manner of the bad servant, if they bothered to listen to these words would, one would hope, repent and reform. If they did not, they were flirting with the sin unto death or apostasy. Are there exceptions where that didn't happen? Possibly, but the parable makes the point strongly giving the two clear sides of the issue and thus provides the guidance we need. The wrong response is for good servants to worry about being in the bad category because they are not perfect; rather they should be happy to be doing things right . . . and perhaps motivated to do even better.

Proportionality of punishment is a biblical principle. But you are right that it doesn't apply to eternity (pace Dante). In eternity, there is proportionality of rewards for believers. Unbelievers experience "the second death", which is an eternal future so awful that it is thus described.
God “will repay each person according to what they have done.” To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
Romans 2:6-10 NIV (cf. Psalm 62:12; Prov. 24:12)
Re: " But experience tells me . . .": You are right to be cautious about that. God knows exactly how to discipline each and every one of us, and He does so in ways that would be obvious to everyone else as well only in extreme cases. The more spiritually immature we are, the longer leash we are given . . . although of course even so we will get our neck yanked if we try to go past the slack. The more we grow, the more closely the Lord deals with us when it comes even to things that in the past we might have considered "small potatoes". Surely you HAVE experienced that? What is the upshot of all this? "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" (Ps.111:10).

Re: "I am sure that happens in the spiritual realm as well (i.e., more asked of those to whom much is given)." Indeed, and that is the main point here. 
The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?” He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.”
Matthew 13:10-12 NIV
When it comes to the truth, we should all want more. Is there additional responsibility that comes along with that knowledge, namely, an obligation to think and speak and act in accordance with it? Indeed there is. Turning away from the truth out of fear of having to obey it is exactly the wrong thing to do, I hope that is obvious. Jesus does tell us to "count the cost" before signing up to be disciples, but can anyone really say that someone is better off NOT having become one? The end thereof is the end of death. 

Is the Christian life a struggle? Yes. But what is the alternative? It is true that James tells us that "My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment" (Jas.3:1 NKJV). But from this I glean that teaching the truth is very serious business and therefore serious commitment is required to go along with it . . . NOT that we should flee the responsibility. I am sure the Lord wants us to be enthusiastic for the truth and for spreading it in whatever manner He gives us to do so, even though that is not what is generally going on in Laodicea today.
I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
Revelation 3:15-16 NIV
In Jesus,

Bob L.
p.s., apologies for any formatting discrepancies; my email server is malfunctioning and it may be a minute until they get it worked out (writing you this in "work around" mode).
Question #15:  
[omitted]
Response #15:   
Re: "In case you haven't caught on, this is, indeed, a criticism of your approach to mental health and trauma, at least from what I understand. Forgive me if there's something I missed." Well, you might have missed what I wrote to you when you told me that you were going to begin "cognitive therapy". Here's the operative part:

I have no idea what "Cognitive Behavioral Therapy" is, so I'm not able to offer you an opinion on that. I think you probably have enough Bible knowledge at this point to be able to discern for yourself, especially once it begins, whether or not it is truly useful or worthless or even harmful. If I had a serious medical problem, in addition to praying and soliciting prayer, I would most likely seek medical attention. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I do pray for you on this issue; I'll say a particular prayer for this.

I have always allowed that we are all different, that I have known people who have been helped through therapy, and that I would never judge another for doing it / getting it – it's their call to make, not mine. 

This is not the same thing as recommending it or embracing it wholeheartedly (which I do not do). Perhaps that is what you are upset about?

I don't have the time or the interest get "into" psychology. I've never seen any particular value to it myself, and surely there are plenty of things about it which ought to give any Christian pause (materialistic in its approach; based upon many very problematic antecedents; etc.). So for that reason too, I'm not going to weigh in in an absolute way. But I do think that beyond any question we who believe in Jesus Christ are always better starting out with divine solutions; and even when we seek secular help, we need to keep the spiritual foremost in mind. If I break my leg, I don't expect the Lord to heal it via prayer (not that He cannot do so, of course); I go to the doctor . . . while praying for a good result, relying on the Lord first and foremost even as I seek this secular help.

I do keep you in prayer.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #16:  
Hi Bob,

1) The main question

There's a question I've been pondering the last little bit. Matthew 7:6 tells us not to cast pearls before swine, meaning we ought to be discerning about who we share the gospel with. But what if someone doesn't want to hear about the Bible or Jesus directly, per se, but they are open to conversations about worldview or where morality comes from, and other such "deeper matters" that are sort of spiritual in nature without being overtly Christian?

What I mean is sort of this: if you were to "declare yourself" upfront and say something like "Hey, I'm a Christian, and I'll be steering this conversation towards trying to convince you that you need Jesus Christ," a lot of people (most people, even) would probably immediately walk away. But if you don't do that, but instead approach deeper spiritual things in a somewhat more roundabout way, you might be able to still have conversations with people that get them thinking, and plant seeds for the gospel that may perhaps bear fruit in the future. But is taking this roundabout approach with people who would reject the gospel if you were to instead state it plainly in some sense "casting pearls before swine"? Or is it not?

Other questions:

Is taking this roundabout approach in any way being "dishonest"? Compare salespeople who might not be completely upfront about their motivations in a conversation (i.e., that they are trying to sell you something). Ordinarily, we would be put off by people not being willing to declare their motivations clearly and above board like that, right? So what then of this hypothetical practice of not openly or at least particularly vocally identifying ourselves as Christians in evangelism/not going straight to the gospel, and not being at all obvious and explicit about what we are trying to do (i.e., in getting them to see the need for Jesus, and accept Him as their Lord and Savior)?

In a similar vein, we would probably be against the idea of salespeople befriending people and cultivating relationships with them mostly for the purpose of harnessing that relationship to then sell them something or otherwise capitalize upon the emotional connection for some other hidden reason. So what of Christians actively seeking out unbelievers to form relationships with for evangelistic purposes? In that, are not Christians mostly forming these relationships in order to share the gospel (that is, with that being their hidden reason, to the extent they do not make it obvious that that is their primary motivation in befriending someone)?

Basically, in evangelism, if someone is forming friendships with unbelievers in order to share the gospel (yet without stating that upfront), and steering conversations with unbelievers with intent in order to push discussion towards the gospel (yet without stating that upfront), are these things a godly use of effective evangelism tactics, or is it something negative in terms of not being entirely honest or forthright?

----------------------------

2) What do you think about the following Bible passages as evidence contributing to how we might view this matter one way or the other?

2.1) When Ecclesiastes 7:16 tells us not to be "overly righteous"---could this be an example of that? That is, could legalistically trying to make rules about "fully disclosing your intent upfront" be the very sort of rigid, inflexible moral rule that this verse warns against?

2.2) What about Jesus speaking in parables, yet not explaining His motivations in doing so to the crowds? It is true he didn't declare His motives in how/why He was speaking as He was, right? (At least not publicly to everyone). Is this an apples-to-apples sort of example?

2.3) What about Jesus not trumpeting his divinity from the rooftops, and in fact not even answering direct questions about it straightly in some places (cf. Matthew 26:63-64; Luke 22:70; John 8:37)? There are also all the places where Jesus tells those he healed or even the demons not to spread this truth about Him before His time. Is this an apples-to-apples sort of example?

2.4) What about Matthew 5:14-16 (not hiding our light as Christians, but letting it shine before others)? Is being sort of indirect and roundabout in how we try to manipulate relationships and conversations towards the gospel going against the idea of openly being lights in the world (a bad thing), or is it being shrewd like serpents in the way Matthew 10:16 commands of us (a good thing)?

------------------------------

Well, I think that covers the gist of what I am curious about. I've been spending some time studying the mechanics of evangelism (in terms of how one might steer everyday conversations towards the gospel, for example), and the resources I've gone through so far do not seem to really touch on this topic. I am usually pretty strongly against what I would consider manipulative behavior (on the part of politicians, advertisers/marketers, salespeople, etc.), but on the other hand, those people operate out of impure motives, while we operate primarily out of a legitimate desire for all to come to saving faith in Jesus Christ. So in that sense, the situations aren't the same.

So is a lack of full disclosure in motives/purpose different from dishonesty? Is it true that not all ulterior motives (in the simple sense of secret/hidden motives) are bad, but only impure ones?

Your friend in Jesus,
Response #16:  
Re: "is taking this roundabout approach with people who would reject the gospel if you were to instead state it plainly in some sense "casting pearls before swine"? Or is it not?" This guidance from our Lord covers a lot more ground than giving the gospel to unbelievers. It covers giving any truth to anyone who is not going to accept it. In fact, the gospel situation I would see as exceptional. If you know you are dealing with unbelievers, giving them guidance or advice or an opinion that is based on the truth is something one always needs to consider carefully. That is the way we think, but we are supposed to be very circumspect in what we say. That is controlling the tongue on the "good side" and works in tandem with controlling it on the "bad side" (i.e., refraining from things believers shouldn't say or would clearly be unwise to say). Whether or not to give the gospel is a judgment call that should be informed by the Holy Spirit. We don't want to be recalcitrant, but in the modern day evangelical church-visible, "button-holing" people to cram it down their throats is the more the rule. For that reason even more so, those of us who are mature and who know something about these issues ought to be doubly careful not to misstep. So being "round about" may be not only a good strategy but a necessary one. The "how to" is more in the realm of evangelism (we are all to evangelize when appropriate, but not everyone has that gift), or apologetics (another specialist area).

Re: "Is taking this roundabout approach in any way being "dishonest"?" No. Of course a lot depends on the "how" exactly, but we're not selling anything and we are not looking out for ourselves but for the welfare of the other person.

Re: "befriending people and cultivating relationships": "Friendship evangelism" is "a thing" in evangelicaldom nowadays. It's not my cup of tea and I have issues with it, but I'm not willing to say it's wrong to do. Again, a lot depends on the specifics of the "how" and also the "to what degree". For all of these things, examining one's own motivations is key. A lot of personal evangelism that takes place is from wrong motives, it seems to me, of people wanting to have something to brag about (even if they don't think about it directly in those terms).

In terms of application, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2Tim.3:16 KJV), so there is often application to be gleaned from any teaching of the truth. For the first passage, I agree that it warns us off of legalism; for the second, our Lord's approach allowed Him to give the truth without those who were swine recognizing so that He would not be trampled, fulfilling prophecy in the process (so this seems different to me from what you are asking about); for the third passage, our Lord does say as you seem to allude to that we are to say openly and loudly what He said (for special reasons) privately and quietly; His telling others not to report and His not answering questions about His deity etc. directly were in my way of seeing this unique to His own unique first advent circumstances; in terms of the last passage, we can be shrewd, it seems to me, and at the same time not hide our light; in the context we are told that it is our good works which people will see – and that surely includes things like doing an exceptional job where others are slacking (this is also what Peter says: 1Pet.3:15: "always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you" NKJV). Given this last passage, Peter envisions people asking YOU not you button-holing others or laying some sort of trap to get them to ask you. In other words, if we are really living like Christians should, this will get people's attention. That will motivate some to ask – then evangelizing them will be like shooting ducks on a pond. But if they see and don't ask, that says something too.

Re: "I am usually pretty strongly against what I would consider manipulative behavior" . . . as you should be. Let's not forget that the Holy Spirit is the Evangelist in Chief. If we are listening to Him and He prompts us to say something, then we should. If He doesn't, or if we are not sure, then possibly waiting and praying is a better option. Again, in practice, these are personal decisions. No one has ever done it right every time.

Going home for Christmas?

Keeping you and yours in my prayers, my friend.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #17:  
Hi Bob,

Yes, I'm planning to be with my family over the holidays. Lots on the agenda for me to do over the break too though...

--------------------------------

As to the present topic, let me ask things this way:

I often find myself turned off by most modern approaches to evangelism. Too forceful, as you say. Generally speaking, trying to witness to strangers with whom you have no relationship just has a low probability of success, and often sours those so accosted on Christianity. At least as I see things.

I have long thought that it is more effective to share Jesus with those whom you have a long-term personal relationship with. They know you, and can see your genuine love for them in the relationship. They will take you seriously because time has proven that you are serious and not faking things. They can see the witness of Christ in your life (actions speaking louder than words).

Now, this doesn't mean you aren't allowed to share the gospel with the stranger sitting next to you on the airplane "because you don't have a long-term relationship with them" (etc.). But that sort of "sharing with a stranger" is a very different sort of thing from "going to the park and approaching random people." In the first case, you get to chatting with someone not so much because you wanted to spring the gospel on them (i.e., starting the conversation strictly to witness), but because it just happened in the course of things. In the latter case, you are trying to make it happen by your own efforts.

So far, all that (i.e., things along the lines of the first case) seems fine and commendable to me. If that is what one means by "relationship-based evangelism" or "friendship-based evangelism," then I think it would be good if there were more of that, and less of the other modern approaches somehow bearing the label of evangelism.

However, that brings us to what I was asking about, which is more along the lines of "going out and making it happen." So it is like the approach-random-people-at-the-park variety of "make it happen on my own efforts" evangelism, but just the relationship-based evangelism equivalent of it. A lot of my questions were sparked by wondering if this sort of "intentionality" and "active-ness" in it is problematic. On the one hand, we don't want to lean so far on the side of "God will bring those whom He calls" that we completely ignore the idea of evangelism altogether. On the other hand, I do sort of wonder at this idea of trying to make friends or start conversations solely out of this motivation---of trying to go out and "make it happen" ourselves rather than waiting for God to open up opportunities for us.

Where I'm finding it difficult is in seeing how far we ought to take the principles here. I like the idea of random conversations that were not somehow designed/premeditated on your part forming the bulk of your evangelistic outreach. Rather than going out of your way to befriend people or start conversations with them in some sort of pseudo-Machiavellian plotting, you instead just go with what comes before you.

But the problem with that is that if you take it so far that you never reach out ever on your end (and are always waiting for the other parties to engage before responding)... well, it takes two to have a relationship, right? And saying never is... well, do we really mean that? Are all street-evangelism stranger-focused efforts then completely misguided (in terms of what we might term "God's first-best Will"), no exceptions?

And how do those with the spiritual gift of Evangelism fit into this, exactly? Modern Evangelical views of this seem to equate "gifted evangelist" with the Billy Graham sort of "event-driven" outreach. That is the "take actions to make it happen" sort of approach, as it seems to me. So if the spiritual gift is not to empower people to do that really, it is more along the lines of them:

Being better at accumulating relationships to begin with (not so much because they seek them out in the plotting for it sense, but just because it is how they are wired/gifted, and it just happens)
Being gifted in how they word things such that they are able to speak the truth into unbelievers' lives without offending them or scaring them away. Again, not so much plotting to make this happen, but the words just come out, similar to how they do for us Bible teachers when "teacher mode" is engaged. It's the Holy Spirit doing the talking.

This would make "evangelism ministries" seem to be not much more than "Wow, that guy seems to have a lot of contacts, and somehow his silver tongue always manages to be able to share the truth with unbelievers without them storming off, whereas I really struggle more to read the room and have that sort of boldness." So it's not so much a "they do it differently" sort of thing, but more of a "they are preternaturally good at this thing that the rest of do, but just not as well" sort of thing. If that makes sense.

----------------------------------

Thoughts?

Your friend in Jesus,
Response #17:   
I agree with your assessments here. One thing I would say, is that there is no cookie-cutter approach. Scripture gives us indications of guidelines, and that is what we are talking about here. Also, the same applies to spiritual gifts. No two people have the same set of gifts or variations thereof. So just as no two pastor teachers will ever have the same approach or the same exact ministries – unless they ARE following some denominational cookie-cutter pattern – so also in evangelism, if we are talking about that as the main gift / ministry thrust for any particular individual. That is not our forte (right?), so we are only considering this in order to explain things to others and give guidance to some who may come to our ministries and be interested/motivated/gifted to move forward in that way. As you know, I'm not a fan of the Billy Graham approach in principle, but I am also loathe to say that it's always (or maybe even ever) wrong. In terms of our own approach as individuals, the more mature a person is spiritually, the better that he/she will be at evangelizing. In terms of getting personal, there is a old saw, "never major in the minor", which is to say, if you are a Classics major minoring in German, if you are spending more time in German than in Classics and/or so much time and effort that you are falling short in your major, then you ought to redefine your priorities. Being a pastor teacher who is actually attempting to "feed the sheep", has that noble task as his main job. If I were personally going to football games with colleagues in an effort to build relationships so as to be able to evangelize them, while that might be a noble purpose from a good motivation, nevertheless I would surely be doing less in the main area of responsibility as a result (we only have so much time). On the other hand, whenever anyone, peer or student, has expressed interest in taking about spiritual matters, I've always done my best not to stint on that.

Do feel free to write back about this.

Have a great and a productive Christmas!

In Jesus,

Bob L.
Question #18:  
Hi Bob,

Background details:

I am doing a supplemental Bible study of my own week by week relating to one of the church group Bible studies I am somewhat involved in. The topic is evangelism, in the sense of what it is and principles of it for us as Christians. The primary study that the group has been going through (i.e., not my things, but the base study) hasn't been too bad really (which is a lot better than I had hoped), but on the other hand, I've disagreed or had warning bells go off here and there. I've had a few people involved with my supplemental Bible study (or at least watching the recordings of it), so it is not without any impact.

What I am emailing you about are mostly the points where I wanted to bounce ideas some/dig a bit deeper, since I wasn't fully buying the views of the base study resources.

Other things:

"We are only considering this in order to explain things to others and give guidance to some who may come to our ministries and be interested/motivated/gifted to move forward in that way."

That's precisely it.

Re: The personal side, I'm not feeling any sort of pressure to go adjust my time expenditure away from teaching and toward evangelism. To me, this is sort of an academic exercise along the lines of "If someone is a person in the Church called primarily towards evangelism (so not me, but someone else), then what materials might they benefit from reading first to get them ready to do it correctly/according to God's wishes? Given that so much of what goes on seems to have some problems, well then what is the 'more right' way to do it?". Things along those lines.

--------------------------------------------------------------

It has occurred to me that the largest part of where I've diverged from the base materials hasn't been so much in approach or the mechanics of things (which was a pleasant surprise, inasmuch as I was fully prepared to disagree there too), but in attitudes toward who does it/hows much focus it is given relative to Bible teaching. In particular, I am thinking of the following areas.

Could you give this outline a brief look, and see if there is any major "caveat" I missed that would further help in terms of making people "think before they leap?" That is the main goal of this stuff, which I plan to put first/upfront when the full evangelism-focused series goes up on YouTube. (I'm also interested to hear what you think of the general points if there is anything that looks off about them, but I think it's all pretty straightforward stuff).

--------------------------------------------------------------

Outline to review:

1) It is possible to engage in evangelism in a less-than-ideal way

Subpoints:

Jugement is the Lord's (also cf. Philippians 1:18), yet nonetheless we should seek to be the most effective ambassadors of Christ we can be, which means only limiting ourselves to the means and methods that God would have us use, and only sending ourselves out into the field when we will be truly capable of doing a good job, and not a moment sooner.

Compare Isaiah 1:11-12; Amos 5:21; Malachi 1:10; 1 Corinthians 11:17, and also cf. Matthew 7:21-23. We cannot expect to receive praise from God for "doing the right things" in an outward sense only. God is a perfect judge who sees into our hearts, and searching ourselves and truly fearing His negative evaluation in godly fear is not only wise, but necessary. Ungifted, unprepared people who damaged the witness of Christ in the world in an attempt to appear holy in the eyes of others by "saving more people" will receive a rebuke on that great Day of Days, not praise. What they do is not biblical evangelism, and should be called out as problematic, rather than encouraged.

Evangelicaldom has plenty of teaching about the importance of evangelism, and how if we don't go, who will? There is truth in these things, and it is proper to warn against the one extreme of being too cowardly to go as witnesses for Christ if it is actually what we are called to do. However, it is also proper to teach about the other extreme, wherein evangelism ends up heavily "overprescribed" (for lack of a better word). That does no one any good.

1.1) Some people have a spiritual gift and ministry calling in evangelism in a way others do not

Subpoints:

While we are all called to be witnesses for Christ (in the sense of 1 Peter 3:15---the witness of how we live speaking for us), those Christians with the formal spiritual gift (and accompanying ministry calling) are categorically different from those of us without it. Not in that there is anything overtly supernatural in how they do it vs. how we do it, but just that due to the Holy Spirit empowering their activities, we need to treat the cases separately, since they are in fact somewhat different."

It is a mistake to send people without formal gifting and substantial preparation into some of the situations that our giften brethren ought to wade into, and it is also a mistake to limit the situations our gifted brethren might partake in only to be those that are more in line with what the rest of us can do without evangelism as our primary gifting. Our abilities are lesser than theirs (entirely because of the work the Holy Spirit does through them rather than because of themselves, to be clear), and we need to treat matters accordingly.

1.2) Just because someone is in fact gifted does not mean they do not have to prepare

Subpoints:

It takes a certain level of spiritual maturity generally before people can speak with confidence and boldness about the truth during evangelism. Given that such a thing is a rather key part of the process, those who want to pursue a ministry of evangelism need to set themselves upon a path of serious spiritual growth, just like everyone else. Only by growing up spiritually can they be truly ready to serve as they ought.

Additionally, while the lead time may not be as long as Bible teaching, evangelism still requires certain specialized preparation in order to be most effective. The question is not if God can use imperfect people despite their lack of preparation (He certainly always does work everything out for good, even despite our failings), but whether that is what He wishes for... which it is clearly not.

While we need to avoid legalistic rule-making, it is true that God uses prepared individuals. We just need to keep that firmly in mind, rather than encouraging a sort of shallow evangelism wherein we send unprepared people out before they are really ready to do it effectively.

1.3) Our motive in evangelism must be pure, else we have no business stepping outside

Subpoints:

Here is a list of some motives that are not acceptable:
Trying to reach people in order to increase the number of people you can claim for your church events

Trying to reach people in order to get their money flowing in your church's coffers
Trying to reach people in order to appear outwardly holy to others around you in your social circles

Trying to reach people because you were guilt-tripped into it by local church leadership
The last point is especially important to emphasize. Guilt is a very powerful emotion, but it ought to have no place in our decision-making as Christians. If we are not willing and eager to roll up our sleeves in evangelism, we probably aren't gifted and called in that area. Simple as that.

1.4) Evangelism can never supplant the importance of Bible teaching in the Church

The last section closed with an observation that people who are not willing and eager to roll up their sleeves in evangelism probably aren't gifted and called in that area.
The fact that this would tend to suggest that many people aren't gifted and called in evangelism goes against a great deal of what modern Evangelicaldom teaches as accepted fact (which is more along the lines that the unease and discomfort is something normal, and everyone should still do it anyway), and there is no getting around that.

It is not cowardice to obey what God wants of you, even if it turns out to be something different than the modern church's preoccupation with evangelism. Instead, it is cowardice to give into guilt-trips and let oneself be pushed into a ministry you are not suited for nor gifted in.
So if many people aren't gifted in evangelism, what are they gifted in? That would be spiritual gifts directed towards the edification of the Body of Christ, not its expansion.

A couple Ichthys quotes on this topic, from here:

"As I say, we are entitled to draw some conclusion from the fact that all but one of the spiritual gifts in the Church are directed towards the edification of the Body of Christ, not its expansion; therefore most of us should be concerned with the growth and welfare of our brothers and sisters in Christ most of the time rather than with the unsaved world (even though this is exactly the opposite of the emphasis that contemporary evangelicalism stresses). I believe that this is because the expansion of the Church is the Lord's prerogative. Every human being presently on the earth who is not a Christian is here for the express purpose of testing their will – do they, will they be willing to turn to God and be saved? God is not willing that any be lost, but wants all to be saved (1Tim.2:4; cf. Ezek.18:23; Matt.18:14; Jn.12:47; 2Pet.3:9). Therefore you can be sure that if a person ends up going to hell, it is not because of lack of information."

And

"I find it highly ironic in the church visible of our day, the era of Laodicea where lukewarmness regarding spiritual growth is the hallmark, that almost no one agonizes about the lack of substantive Bible teaching, the lack of truly prepared Bible teachers, the lack of truly orthodox Bible churches, the lack of interest in pursuing a truly deep relationship with Jesus through the truth of scripture – but it seems that almost every group and voice out there in evangelicalism-land does agonize about witnessing. This is no doubt because where the hard unseen work of the Christian life is left out, tangible signs are always sought as replacements – that has always been a hallmark of legalistic thinking. This is the reason of course why the Charismatics are doing so well: no one wants to do the hard work of spiritual growth but they still want to "feel spiritual"; enter groups who give them tangible signs such as tongues and healing and other miracles. Now tongues and healing and other miracles are wonderful if they truly come from God, but only if they truly come from God. In the same way, an emphasis on witnessing is a wonderful thing if it truly is and outgrowth of spiritual growth, but not if it is an attempt to substitute for spiritual growth."

--------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the feedback so far. It is helping me plan things better, I think.

Your friend in Jesus,
Response #18:  
This is excellent! I even like the two quotations (LOL).

The only caveat I would add here is in regards to the fact that this work-up is "relating to one of the church group Bible studies I am somewhat involved in". Your presentation is very blunt. If this is for your website et al., fine and well. However, I would be very reluctant myself to launch it at a group that believes in all the misapplications you have shared. On the one hand, I think they would get very defensive very fast. On the other, I think you would find yourself getting the boot pretty quick. 

Keeping you and your ministry in my daily prayers, my friend.

In Jesus,

Bob L.
http://ichthys.com/