I used to work at a farm that sold sheep and goats to ethnic Muslim immigrants from all over the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. One day, as I was working on some chores, several young Mauritanian men walked in the door and asked me to help them choose a couple of lambs to butcher. Afterwards, I noticed one of the young men hanging around the barn, looking at the animals. Detecting some curiosity, I stopped my work, and he began asking me questions about the Amish way of life. Eventually we began discussing religion, and he asked me about the difference between the Old and New Testaments. Sensing an opportunity to share the Gospel, I described the Old and New Covenants and the opportunity Jesus’ incarnation and sacrifice made for fallen humanity to be reconciled with a holy God. After some further conversation, we exchanged phone numbers and parted ways.
Evangelism used to be a scary word for me. I used to think that evangelism basically meant having confrontational arguments with strangers, like the dialogue I related in my last post. While I have a lot to learn, one thing I’ve realized is that evangelism doesn’t have to be so intimidating. It can spring from a normal human interaction as mundane as a conversation at work!
In my last post, I outlined some harmful beliefs that dampen our enthusiasm for evangelism: (1) Evangelism is the personal, primary responsibility of every individual believer, (2) evangelism is necessarily confrontational, and (3) results don’t matter in evangelism. These concepts combine to create an image of evangelism as daunting and near impossible, and yet the personal duty of every believer. However, I believe that evangelism doesn’t need to be intimidating or guilt-inducing. In this post, I will support a model of evangelism that imitates Christ’s example of incarnation in reaching the world, and I will compare this model to the three misconceptions I described above.
The biblical case for incarnational evangelism
One commonly cited passage in support of incarnational evangelism is Philippians 2:5-8:
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Missiologist Michael Frost explains the implications of Christ’s example demonstrated in this passage:
Paul… tells us that our ‘attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus’ (Philippians 2:5). We often assume that this passage then commends to us Jesus’ humility, which is clearly present in the text. But Jesus’ humility is commended to us insofar as it is expressed in his commitments to identification and relinquishment. First, to follow Jesus’ example means that we should share his profoundly humble identification with sinful humankind (Philippians 2:7b-8a). Second, those of us who wish to emulate Jesus should be aware of his equally humble willingness to empty himself and make himself nothing for the sake of God’s redemptive purposes (Philippians 2:6-7a)… To embrace an incarnational ministry, then, involves a willingness to relinquish our own desires and interests in the service of others.1
In other words, Christ demonstrated his humility in two particular areas: Christ identified with sinful humanity by becoming human, and Christ emptied himself for us by his sacrifice of life and divine status. Following Christ’s example implies that, just as Jesus “dwelt among us” (John 1:14), we also must live in close proximity to those we are trying to reach, whether this means physically living in their community or setting aside time to involve ourselves in their lives. In addition, just as Jesus “became flesh” (John 1:14), so we also should identify ourselves with those we are reaching, willing to empty ourselves in our efforts to share Christ (p.19). I believe this is what the apostle Paul was getting at when he wrote,
Though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became a Jew, in order to win Jews… To those outside the law I became as one outside the law… I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).
Paul was willing to take on different identities and lifestyles to reach people from different cultural and religious backgrounds, following Christ’s example of emptying himself to make the Gospel known. With these examples in mind, I would like to elaborate on several characteristics of incarnational evangelism that may run counter to some of our preconceptions.
Corporate responsibility
First, evangelism is the corporate mission of the church rather than the personal, primary responsibility of every believer. As Paul writes in Ephesians 4:11-12, “[Christ] 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”. In this passage, Paul lists different types of people God provides to build up the church – and evangelism is merely one of these gifts. Paul seems to be saying that, in order for the church to be effective in its mission, the body of Christ actually needs people who are primarily involved in activities other than evangelism.
If this is true, then I as an individual Christian do not bear the crushing weight of reaching the entire world alone. I am a member of the Church, whose mission is to reach the world. Therefore, I am called to be faithful in exercising my giftings within the church to “equip the saints for the work of ministry”. Notice the nuance! I am still responsible for reaching the world because I am a part of the church. However, I also recognize that I am just a small part of God’s grand mission for the church. If my primary role is building up the church in some way so that it can perform its mission more effectively, this is perfectly legitimate! While I must be eager to share my faith and ready to give an answer for the hope within me (1 Peter 3:15), it’s ok if evangelism is not my primary role.
Relational rather than confrontational
Second, incarnational evangelism tends to be focused on relationships and discipleship rather than on confrontation. When confrontation does occur – as it must when the Gospel confronts an unbiblical worldview – it does so in the context of relationships. This principle draws heavily on the example of Jesus, who was famously referred to as a “friend of sinners” (Matthew 11:19, Luke 7:34). As Brad Brisco says, “people who were not like Jesus liked Jesus”.2 Jesus took time to establish relational connections with people such as Zaccheus (Luke 19:1-10) and the Samaritan woman (John 4:1-45). And let’s not forget the twelve disciples! As I maintained in my last post, confrontation certainly has its place in some circumstances. However, though oft repeated, it’s worth noting that Jesus’ most confrontational interactions were generally with the religious elite, not tax collectors and prostitutes.
Again, my point here isn’t to illegitimatize all confrontational ministry (such as street evangelism), but rather to build a proactive case for a more relational approach. When we incarnate ourselves into a community, building relationships with our neighbors, we create a platform of legitimacy from which we can share Christ meaningfully. When we enter a community, blast people with preaching and literature, and leave, we tend to ignore these opportunities. I find that most Christians have no objection to a relational, incarnational approach in the context of foreign missions. Perhaps it’s time we realized that evangelism in our post-Christian society is a lot closer to cross-cultural missions than we might think; perhaps our strategies of evangelism should reflect this.
Discipleship-oriented rather than message-focused
Third, incarnational evangelism focuses on the people we are relating to rather than the message we are relating. This contrasts to the idea that results don’t matter in evangelism. In other words, I want to know how people are interacting with the Gospel message rather than being satisfied that they are merely exposed to it somehow. This principle is largely informed by my philosophy of evangelism: if I consider evangelism to be the propagation of a message, I will focus on disseminating that message to as many people as possible, regardless of the response I get. Given this assumption, I think street preaching is probably one of the most efficient ways to do evangelism! However, if we prioritize the formation of disciples, we will pay attention to how our message is received, focusing on relationships and taking care not to unnecessarily alienate potential disciples.
In their book, The 9 Arts of Spiritual Conversations, Mary Schaller and John Crilly write that many American Christians seem to believe that, before evangelism, we focus solely on propagating the Gospel message. Only if someone converts to Christianity do we then switch over to discipleship mode and attend to spiritual growth. However, Schaller and Crilly maintain that this is a false dichotomy; we should focus on disciple-making from day one. They write,
If discipleship is helping those around us engage with God by engaging with them, that all starts the minute we choose to love them with his love – not just after their moment of salvation. Let’s have conversations about God flow naturally from our interest in others and see whom God leads toward more intentional discipling and ongoing discussions about Jesus. We’ve made it harder than it needs to be.3
Evangelism doesn’t need to be comprised solely of shouting to deaf ears, devoid of results. Evangelism can be relational and discipleship-oriented – and it should bear results! If our evangelism does not result in disciple-making, perhaps it’s time to reevaluate our strategy.
Proximity to the community
I’m going to insert a brief note here on the importance of proximity to those we are trying to reach. As Anabaptists, we have a tendency to live down long dirt lanes out in the country (or paved blacktop lanes if you’re from Lancaster County!). In other words, we generally live far removed from the population centers we target in our evangelistic efforts. When we view evangelism as a duty to be performed periodically rather than a counter-cultural lifestyle, we may relegate it to special trips to the nearest city to pass out tracts. However, identification with those we are trying to reach requires us to be near them somehow. This may imply that we need to move into the communities we are ministering to, or at least that we create meaningful opportunities to be involved in people’s lives.
I considered leaving this point out; for one thing, I myself have spent most of my life living down a long country lane! I would also like to say that many of my friends at my home church are deeply committed to reaching out to their Amish friends and relatives in rural Pennsylvania. I’m not trying to say that Christians can’t live in the country. I’m saying that we need to live intentionally in contexts where our lives can have an impact for God’s Kingdom.
Conclusion
In this post, I’ve attempted to build a proactive case for incarnational evangelism, a model of ministry that seeks to imitate Christ in his example of identifying with and emptying himself for humanity. Incarnational evangelism is the corporate responsibility of the church rather than the personal mission of the individual. It works through relationships rather than confrontation, and it is concerned with the formation of disciples rather than the dissemination of a message. As we relate to our neighbors and make connections in our communities, evangelism can take the form of inviting a neighbor over for dinner, attending a funeral or community meeting, or giving a friend a ride to work. While we must be firm in our convictions and bold in sharing the Gospel, we don’t have to be aggressive, focused solely on getting someone to the point of conversion. We can allow conversations about Christ to spring naturally from our relationships as the Holy Spirit connects us with people who are seeking God, speaking with authority and relevance from the platform we have created by identifying with the community.
Ultimately, incarnational evangelism boils down to one thing: love. As Paul famously says, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Corinthians 13:1). I can preach the Gospel, move into a needy community, and even seek to build relationships with my neighbors, but if I am not motivated by a true love for God and neighbor, it all means nothing. Evangelism is ultimately love in action. As we love our neighbors as ourselves, we will draw people to Christ. I don’t believe it really needs to be more complicated than that.
Amen. This is good. I still don’t know who BJS is, but keep writing.
Hey thanks!