I was speaking from Matthew 10:5-15 this past Sunday on a message called “Messy Christianity.” As I was studying some of the commentators said the reason Jesus wouldn’t allow the disciples to preach to the Gentiles and the Samaritans was because they weren’t equipped to reach them because of their background, knowledge and technique. I’ll be honest as I read their views it hit me like a ton of bricks.
- How do you know if you are equipped to reach certain people?
- If you are not, how do you become equipped?
- Or is it possible that there are certain groups of of people that you just can’t reach?
What do you think?
Do we mean “convinced” (vs simply “informed”) when we say “reached”? Maybe it would be helpful to work backwards. If someone was convinced, it was because of some combination of the following:
1 – God “spoke” to the person
2 – The person was given compelling reasons to believe
3 – The person was influenced emotionally to believe
Any of these things might happen over a period of time rather than all at once. I can’t think of any others, can you?
1 – Other than prayer, you have no control over whether God speaks to the person.
2- You can improve your rational witness by knowing both sides of the arguments. Studying apologetics is a great way to learn the arguments for belief. There is tons of it out there in book and web-site form to justify just about any Christian view from Catholicism to Mormonism.
Studying the classic arguments about religion and God is a great way to understand the arguments both for and against belief. Wikipedia has some good summaries – here are a couple of examples:
Existance of God:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God#Metaphysical_arguments_.28for.29
Rationality of belief:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_religion#Rationality_of_belief
Another good way to understand both sides of the argument is to read the philosophers. Here is a really good book, “Fifty Major Philosophers” by Collinson and Plant, to get you up to speed quickly:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0415346096?tag=justthink-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0415346096&adid=067V6NEZB0SQAVX7WZDC&
3 – People can be convinced by both positive (e.g., love) and negative (e.g. fear) emotional messages. People who feel unloved or mistreated can be positively influenced by treating them with love and kindness. People who feel that they are lost and have no direction in life or perhaps feel that their life has no purpose are susceptible to someone who is confident in his or her own convictions and purpose.
On the negative end, the fear of death, eternal damnation, and the wrath of God can be a primary motivator for certain people.
The trick here is to know which emotional messages will have a positive effect for the person that you want to convince.
Finally, to get to your last question: I think that some people can’t be reached. I’ve heard debates between evangelical Christians and Mormons where each was so completely “convinced” that his beliefs were correct that neither was willing to listen long enough to really understand the other’s point of view. I put “convinced” in quotes here because it seemed as if each was afraid that if he allowed himself to merely understand the opposing position, he would lose faith in his own position. I’ve seen this kind of thing across the board, regardless of faith or the lack thereof. I think it’s just human nature.
Deep discomfort and an inability to cross a cultural, linguistic, or philosophical divide may be clues that you’re just not the one who’s supposed to carry the message to a particular person or a group of people. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t work to bridge those divides, but I think we get caught up in this idea that a good Christian/minister/teacher should be able to do it all. I don’t think God works that way. We’re created differently, we all have different talents, we all come from different backgrounds, and God uses each of us. The problem is that not everyone obeys, so we see these gaps, and want to fill them, even if we aren’t particularly equipped for it.
I think the problem may also be that we only know 1 way of telling a person about the Lord Jesus. We can only present it in one way – Romans Road, EE or whatever – so when someone doesn’t fit the box, we don’t have say anything or we barge in anyway.
For me this is where the leadership of the Holy Spirit and following His nudging can help reach some people we wouldn’t ordinarily reach.
I might suggest a different reason for Jesus’ command. Maybe it was that his ministry right then was to the Jews and not the Samaritans or Gentiles.
I lean heavily on what I learned in “Experiencing God” in matters like this. It’s not so much a “preparation” as it is a revealing of what God’s already prepared for you.
It’s like a smart politician in that aspect: I don’t know how to define it, but I know it when I see it.
I think there are some people that we are in a poor position to reach – certain in-laws, for example. That doesn’t mean that I don’t try, but I don’t want to polarize them further. I do pray a Matthew 9:37-38 prayer (Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.”) so that God will send someone to them that they will listen to.
I also try to be the answer to someone else’s Matthew 9:37-38 prayer.
I thought that nobody could come to the Son unless the Father draws them. That being the case, why worry about reaching others with your message? It’s all up to God’s will, if I read that correctly.
AAA is so right where competing Christians are concerned! What, eaxctly, do they fear, if they should actually consider another’s viewpoint? God’s wrath? Losing salvation? Jesus having a hissy fit?
On relection- the fear probably stems from the awful thought that all of their preconceptions are wrong, that their comfort zone is open to challenge, that they just might have to start thinking for themselves. I can imagine that this could create a lot of anxiety in some poeople, and this would lead to shutting off from others’ views.
Some Christians have closed minds, but that doesn’t disprove Christianity any more than closed minded atheists prove there is a God.
There is a little mystery regarding exactly how God draws us. If the Bible is considered in a literal, wooden fashion then one could take a fatalistic approach to evangelism and just sit back. But if we truly love Jesus we will obey his commandments, one of which was to make disciples of all nations. And when we do that we’ll find that it is one of the great joys in life (Philemon 6: I pray that you may be active in sharing your faith, so that you will have a full understanding of every good thing we have in Christ.)
AAA – in debates I wouldn’t expect either speaker to be swayed. I view them as more for the audience.
Francoise,
I think you are right: a lot of closed-mindedness is due to fear of leaving the comfort zone, out of having to re-evaluate certain views, perhaps for the first time. I should clarify though: I don’t think that ALL Christians are closed-minded, just like I don’t think that ALL atheists are open-minded. However I do find from my personal experience that fundamentalists (of any sort) tend to be more closed-minded whereas freethinkers tend to be more open-minded.
Neil,
I think you’re right that debates are often staged to sway an audience. But that’s not always the case – people have private debates all the time. But whether the debate is staged or not, I would expect debaters to gain new knowledge from a debate. I would expect people, even debaters, to be swayed by newly acquired knowledge.