CH SPURGEON: Do try, as far as you can, to make the very way in which you speak minister to the great end you have in view. Preach, for instance, as you would plead if you were standing before a judge, and begging for the life of a friend, or as if you were appealing to the Queen herself on behalf of someone very dear to you. Use such a tone in pleading with sinners as you would use if a gibbet were erected in this room, and you were to be hanged on it unless you could persuade the person in authority to release you. That is the sort of earnestness you need in pleading with men as ambassadors for God. (The Soul Winner)
Evangelicals believe in conversion. It’s absolutely foundational. The human race is either in or out. We’re born out. We need to come in through Christ.
But then, what are we coming in to? Because if you only think in terms of “in or out” then it might start to sound like the Christian community is the safe-house and the world is going to hell. And the church says: “Bring em in, batten down the hatches and ride out the storm.” It’s us against the world and the godly traffic is all heading towards the safe-house.
This sounds like the conservative Christian picture. But it’s missing a key element. God.
You see God is out-going. The Father is a Sender – of His Son and Spirit. We need to be in. But we need to be in on the One who is ever going out. Therefore, with Christ, the church says: “Get on out there, reach into the world in order to bless.” It’s us for the world and the godly traffic is all heading towards the outsider.
We must, by all means, believe in conversion. But let’s understand what we are converted to. We want people in, but we want them in on radical out-going-ness.
What do you associate with the phrase “man-centred evangelism”? What would self-centred evangelism look like?
I have a tract in front of me. A fairly innocuous cover – it could be about anything.
Open it up and straight away you’re confronted with death and judgement. When we die we will open our eyes either in a state of supreme happiness or unbelievable anguish. There is no annihilation, no re-incarnation, no escape.
The next page tells us How to be sure of heaven. There follow nine numbered points. These include (among other things) ‘repenting’, ‘coming’ to Jesus, ‘trusting in’ Jesus, ‘looking to’ Jesus, ‘receiving’ Jesus, ‘confessing ‘ Jesus, and ‘reading your Bible and praying every day’. These are all separately listed under the heading ‘How to be sure of heaven.’ The work of Jesus is mentioned in the midst of a couple of these points – His death on “Calvary” is instrumental in your forgiveness and something you must realise and trust in.
It concludes with a sinners’ prayer.
Now… let me say I love first contact evangelism, I love tracts. I use them often. I’ve just been out door-knocking our parish and found it a very fruitful time. I don’t fault anyone for a sense of gospel urgency and a desire to reach out. So let’s not get hung up on the particular example, but let’s talk about the theology behind it.
The theology fueling this is not confined to tracts. Some folks seem to reverse engineer their gospel from the throne of judgement. And they bring it all back to here and now and me. The logic goes like this:
In thefuture there will be a judgement.
Today you can prepare for that ‘great assize’ by making some changes.
By the way, in the past Jesus did some things that open up the possibility for your salvation today.
But anyway, back to today. Back to you. Here are the nine things you need to do…
There are numerous problems here, but let me name some of them…
The entire presentation is not an announcement of good news. It is an ultimatum.
It’s not about Christ and what He has done, it’s about you and what you must do.
Your problem, in these presentations, is not really Christlessness. It’s the future flames which you want to avoid if you know what’s good for you.
God’s solution – salvation – is not knowing God through Jesus (John 17:3), it’s escaping hell. Meaning…
There is no obvious connection between believing in Jesus and being saved (apart from Jesus’ atonement being instrumental somehow). Therefore…
Trusting Jesus becomes about trusting a mechanism of atonement, not a Mediator who atones. Furthermore…
Faith in Jesus is blatantly a means to another end: escaping hell. Which means…
No love for Christ is being encouraged, only love for self. Thus…
True faith is not being elicited here. You can tell this because…
Christ in His word is not creating faith (He and His work are barely mentioned), the evangelist is commanding faith. But…
Faith is not a response to commands, it’s a response to promises. Similarly…
Faith is not a contribution we make to our salvation (along with 8 other steps we need to take), it is the gift of God that comes as Christ, in His gospel, takes hold of us.
That’s what evangelism is then – placarding Christ. And yes, talk about judgement – but talk about the condemnation that is our Christlessness, now and eternally (John 3:18). Talk about salvation, but talk about Christ as our salvation. And talk about repentance and faith, but talk about it in the context of Christ offered to you. Don’t make it your offering to Him.
If we fail to be thoroughly Christ-centred in evangelism we will be man-centred, no matter how much we quote the King James Bible, no matter how fundamentalist we sound, no matter how proud we are of ‘preaching the hard truths.’ Without Christ it always comes back to me. Only Christ-centredness is true God-centredness.
The gospel is not ‘the clever option’ for a discerning religious consumer. It’s “life unto the dead”. What does that mean for our evangelism?
Many times I’ve written against ‘Hercules at the cross-roads’ evangelism. Unbelievers are not decision-makers who need to be cajoled or coerced to ‘take a step’. Unbelievers are ‘Lazarus in the tomb’ – dead in sins and desperately needing the voice of the Son of God.
Well alright, I hear you saying… But, Glen, at some stage you need to “close the deal”, surely. At some point the unbeliever needs to make a choice right? Even if it’s all about ’receiving Jesus’, fine, there’s still something for the unbeliever to do, isn’t there? So how do you preach that without falling back into Decision Theology?
Now before I have a stab at an answer, let me distinguish between what must happen in evangelism and what the unbeliever is capable of. What must happen is that the unbeliever must be born again, they must be forgiven by God, they must be adopted by the Father, they must be united to the Son, they must be sealed with the Spirit, they must be cleansed by the blood of Jesus, they must be pronounced righteous (i.e. justified), they must be made a new creation. I’m not laying out discrete stages in salvation here – I’m speaking about the same truth from different angles. The unbeliever must beconverted. But notice this: they must be converted. No-one can get themselves reborn or forgiven, or adopted, or united, or sealed, or cleansed, or justified, or recreated.
What musthappen in evangelism is precisely what the unbeliever can’t do. I know I keep stressing this, but it needs to be stressed: sinners can’t save themselves. Salvation belongs to the LORD.
But, having said all this, there is a call to repent. So what does it look like?
Well think of Lazarus called from the tomb. ”Come forth” was the resounding command. Here’s something very definite for Lazarus to do. And he did it. But just think… later that day, as Lazarus had the unusual experience of enjoying his own wake, he could have said: “I heard Jesus’ voice and I decided to obey” (cf John 5:25). That’s one way of putting it.
But put yourself in the shoes of those would-be mourners, listening to Lazarus. As he recounts how he beat death, you’d be smiling and nodding, all the while you’d know what had really happened. You’d seen it all from Christ’s perspective. It was the voice of the Son of God that raised him and Lazarus found himself unable to do anything but “come forth”.
Lazarus’s story is a conversion story – Jesus set it up like that back in John 5 (see v24-29). And this story includes the perspective of the listener – a perspective which involves decision. Every sinner has a “how I beat death” story. There are rational processes that we can reflect upon. But all this is reflection upon a miracle. What was actually decisive was the Word raising the dead.
So… and now, finally, I’m going to say something mildly practical… when I call unbelievers to receive Jesus, I try not to frame it as a “decision” they need to weigh up. I announce Jesus as the Lord. I paint Him in biblical colours, I tell them what He’s done and along the way I say things like:
“Don’t you just love this Jesus?”,
“Are you finding yourself drawn to this Jesus?”,
“Are you beginning to feel that He really is Lord?”
“Do you want Him?”
Basically I allow the word of Jesus to draw them. (That’s the point of biblical evangelism – letting the voice of the Son of God be heard). And then, at certain points, I’ll say “If you are feeling drawn to Jesus, that is God calling you.” Or I’ll say “If you are now sensing in your heart that Jesus really is Lord, you’re becoming a Christian. Because a Christian is someone who looks to Jesus and says “Yes, He’s the One.” Is that happening to you?”
I’m not so much into telling them “Choose to make Jesus Lord of your life.” I’m telling them “Jesus is Lord, whatever you feel about the matter. If you can’t see it you must be blind. If you can see it, that’s God opening your eyes. Don’t refuse His Gift – receive Jesus, He’s yours.”
Here we have an artist’s dream. If you’re a film-maker, a writer, a playwright – you would love to depict this scene: Humanity putting its Maker on trial. What a scenario! All the Gospels tell us about this in some detail – these show trials with trumped up charges. Because the bible makes it clear: the so called judges in these trials are the guilty ones. The one in the dock is the only innocent one. Nonetheless He stoops into the dock, to be tried by His creatures. This is the Judge of the world, judged.
And what we see in Jesus is the most incredible stillness and poise. He is like a mirror, reflecting back the accusations of His prosecutors. At every stage of His cross-examination, He manages to get confessions out of His prosecutors! Ingenius!
The brilliance of Jesus is to allow their judgements of Him to judge them. Their accusations only end up accusing them. This is true any time you try to judge a great one.
If you call Shakespeare hackneyed and cliched, it doesn’t reflect badly on Shakespeare, it reflects badly on you. If you call the Grand Canyon “a glorified ditch”, or the Great Wall of China “shoddy workmanship”, or Lionel Messi “a Sunday-league amateur” – that tells you nothing about Shakespeare or the Grand Canyon or the Great Wall or Lionel Messi. It tells you everything about you.
When we judge the Judge it tells us nothing about Him it tells us everything about ourselves. Do you want to know what you’re like? Think about this judgement scene. The Judge of the world condescends into the dock and submits to these kangaroo courts. And we – the judges – find Him guilty of a capital offence. What is His crime? To be the Son of God.
When our Maker goes on trial we find Him worthy of death? Why? For being who He is.
In Luke 23 we see everyone making this verdict: the powerful, the weak, the Jews, the non-Jews, the rich, the poor – everyone deems Him worthy of death. And what is Jesus’ response?
He goes to the cross. And as He is hoisted up He prays “Father forgive them, they don’t know what they’re doing.” (v34)
The Judge is judged. He does not protect Himself or justify Himself. He exposes Himself to every accusation, every insult, every blow – both judicial and physical. And He retaliates with mercy: “Father, forgive.” This is the heart of God for you.
Recently I was asked what I knew about evangelistic treasure hunts. Not much was the answer. I’d read a couple of blogs here and there, but for those completely new to it, here’s a short video of practitioners from the States:
Here’s what I like…
1. They want to “take it to the streets”.
2. They believe in the universal love of God and want to express it.
3. They see people as “treasure.”
4. They want to care for whole people, not just save souls.
5. They want to be sensitive to the Spirit’s work in mission.
I affirm all these values. But for these very reasons I want to question the practice of treasure hunting- and I mean genuinely to “question” it. I’m a newcomer to this and in no position to dismiss it. But here are some initial thoughts that explore the foundations of the church’s mission. If this starts a dialogue about it, then good and I’m more than willing to be educated about these things… But I wonder whether treasure hunting in practice ends up undermining all the positives listed above.
1. They want to “take it to the streets”.
I’m all for taking the gospel to the streets (see links at the bottom of this post). But that’s the issue: what exactly are we taking to the streets? What is the mission of the church? Put it another way: For what purpose is the church sent into the world?
(Notice that this question is different to “What are all the things the body of Christ gets up to, week by week?” The church is involved in many activities, but asking why it has been sent into the worldis a significantly different question.)
My expanded thoughts on the church’s mission can be found here and here but for now let me draw your attention to 2 Corinthians 4 and 5 and especially…
We do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. (2 Cor 4:5)
Essentially, the mission of the church is not “service” in the abstract, with proclamation fitting underneath (see diagram). And it’s not “service” on one hand and “proclamation” on the other (the context in 2 Cor. 4-5 makes that clear). Mission is proclamation – setting forth the truth plainly (v2), with “service” fitting underneath.
Proclamation is the umbrella activity – everything else fits explicitly under the preaching of Christ as Lord. If this is the case then the footing on which you engage the world matters. And the footing ought to be proclamation.
In 1 Corinthians 1-2, Paul is adamant that preaching the weak-looking cross is the way forward. He contrasts it with the demands of the Greeks (for wisdom) and the Jews (for miracles) and he insists that preaching is how we engage.
In the past I’ve taken flak when arguing against “wisdom-first” mission (i.e. evidentialist apologetics). Now, in the interests of offending all people equally, let me argue against “power-first” mission too. As we’ll see, I’m not against wisdom or power in the cruciform sense – but I think there’s an explicit order and a context for these things…
2. They believe in the universal love of God and want to express it.
This is a brilliant value to hold. The trouble is the practice of treasure hunting looks like it undermines that value. One of the distinctive features of treasure hunting is going after the few and passing by the many. The beauty of open air is that it’s the one form of evangelism that seeks to be as indiscriminate as God’s own evangelistic purpose. He has placed us where we are so that all people might find him (Acts 17:26-27). Therefore a way of evangelism (i.e. open air) that seeks to reach a locality as a locality is a wonderful reflection of God’s universal love. If you want to reflect God’s universal love, I’d recommend open air over treasure hunting which is unnecessarily particular.
3. They see people as “treasure.”
This is nice, and a great reflection of the true meaning of Matthew 13:44-46 - we are the treasure and we need to be found. Of course the other word – “hunt” – is not so nice. But maybe the hunted don’t mind?
My reservation here is something that also applies to open air, but I think the whole set-up of treasure hunts amplifies the danger: non-Christians are not marks to hit, or scalps to win. We’re not interested in “gaining converts” but in offering Christ. If you ask me, the writing up of targets sets up the whole enterprise in a questionable way. Far better to speak from a fullness than to need responses. It’s not about you achieving your witnessing goals, but about you emptying yourself for your hearers. There seems a very great danger of commodifying your listeners with treasure hunts.
4. They want to care for whole people, not just save souls.
Full disclosure – I’m not from charismatic circles. The churches I grew up in were as dogmatically anti-charismatic as they were anti-liberal. For years I thought evangelicals were defined by what we didn’t believe in: we weren’t liberal and we weren’t charo’s. That’s my background. And yet, very often when I’m doing open air evangelism I’ve ended up praying for someone in need – whether for physical or emotional healing or for God to come through in some situation or other. I don’t consider myself “gifted” to heal in any charismatic sense, but I’ve prayed for it often enough. Everyone street evangelist I know ends up praying for people – for healings, for “breakthroughs” in personal situations, for whatever. You can’t offer Christ without talking to people in need, and you can’t be a Christian without wanting to help those people.
I love that treasure hunters pray for folks on the streets – I do it too. But I have great reservations about encountering folk in order to tick off clues, and about leading with ‘power’, when Paul tells me to lead with the word of the cross (see points 1 and 5).
5. They want to be sensitive to the Spirit’s work in mission.
This is wonderful. The prayerful preparation involved in Treasure Hunting is great. May we all learn from it. Also cultivating a moment-by-moment dependence on the Spirit’s leading throughout our evangelism is priceless. ”Spirit, help me… Open his/her eyes” is my constant prayer in open air work. But let’s ask: what is the work of the Spirit?
I fear that too often we make an equation between the Spirit and what Enlightenment people think of as “the supernatural“. Since modern people (Christians included it seems) have booted God “upstairs”, we consider this world as a “natural” realm of cause and effect. But then Christians come along and say “Yes, but there’s also another realm over and above called “the supernatural” and it’s all about un-natural, unexpected stuff happening.” And so essentially Christians agree with the naturalists about the basic structure of reality, we just insist that cause and effect aint all there is – there’s also freaky stuff.
What will evangelism look like then? Well, we’ll want to introduce unbelievers to this other realm. And so “the miraculous” seems a perfectly appropriate way in. Trouble is, the Spirit is not so much the Spirit of “the supernatural”, He’s the Spirit of Christ. The way the realm of the Spirit breaks into this world is in the Anointed One. Heaven meets earth in Jesus and every meeting we try to arrange between unbelievers and God needs to reflect that.
In 1 Corinthians 1 Paul has rejected the tactic of giving “Jews” the “miraculous signs” they demand. He thinks that will undermine his message. Nonetheless in chapter 2 he says he wants his evangelism to demonstrate the Spirit’s power (v4). Ok great. What form will that demonstration take? It’s not in wise and persuasive words and it’s not in miraculous “powers”. It’s in preaching the cross (2:2). There the Spirit shines His light with almighty power (1:18). There is the meeting of heaven and earth. And Paul says, it’s very possible to distract non-Christians from that centre. It’s very possible to empty the cross of its power (1:17).
Lest we ever do that, let’s determine to know nothing except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. He is the whole focus of the Spirit’s work. Let us then, as Spirit-filled, Spirit-dependent witnesses, make Christ and His work our focus. That is truly Spirit-ual evangelism.
.
Here are some older posts on how I try to share Christ publicly…
Marilyn Monroe: “The sex symbol becomes a thing, I hate being a thing. I’ve never liked sex myself. I don’t think I ever will. It seems just the opposite of love”
Actually Christians disagree. Christians say:
GK Chesterton: “Every man who knocks on the door of a brothel is looking for God.”
Sex and love belong together, profoundly.
Sex and God belong together, profoundly.
To understand sex we need to understand the Christian view of God, the universe and everything. Then we can see where sex fits…
Luke 3:21-22: Jesus enters our filth to bring us to His Family.
God’s Family (the Trinity) is the origin of gender.
The way into that Family (oneness with Jesus) is the origin of marriage.
Now we can understand the Christian sexual ethic. Gender reflects the difference-in-equality of God. Marriage reflects the saving love of Jesus.
In the Gospels Jesus affirms both of these foundational points in Matthew 19.
Therefore, according to Jesus, sex is God’s way of saying to another human being “I belong to you completely, permanently and exclusively.” It’s the most romantic view of sex imaginable.
And - more profoundly – it’s a proclamation of the ultimate oneness available in Jesus and the ultimate love He brings us into.
That’s why GK Chesterton was right: everyone knocking on the door of the brothel is looking for God.
But don’t settle for the picture of intimacy and oneness – receive the reality. Come to Jesus and know the truth of what sex points towards.
This is different to a version I demonstrated a few months ago. Back then I drew the world twice – once with Adam taking it down and once with Christ raising it up. That’s obviously not ideal – Christ saves this world. So in this version we’ve overcome that problem with the help of a nifty fold – Christ descending onto this world to do Adam’s job right. I much prefer this version – not least because you get to do a bit of gospel origami!
I’m sorry I’m not trying to be rude, I don’t know how to address you, not being Buddhist myself.
I heard your “teaching” (sorry if that sounds patronising, I don’t know what you call it :-?) at a uni thing put on by the Buddhist Society. A friend invited me and tbh I was there for the free lunch. Lol! – no offence.
Anyway. You’re clearly a good speaker and you seem like a nice guy. But this is why your teaching is SO INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS.
In the interests of full disclosure, let me tell you that I am A PRACTISING CARNIVORE. And proud of it! Right now I’m half-way through a cornish pasty and I’m LOVING it. That probably sounds BLASPHEMOUS to you, but it’s WHO I AM.
I can’t remember a time when I haven’t enjoyed sausages, steaks, fried chicken, you name it. And I can honestly say it has NEVER done me ANY harm. (Alright, there was that dodgy kebab last week, but you can’t judge a whole food group by one salmonella infection). You preach about meat but you’ve never had a bacon sandwich yourself, so how on earth can you comment??
Maybe I’ve now committed some “”sin”" by tempting you with the wonders of bacon but, honestly, I think if God – or whoever – exists he wants you to be happy :-)
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve tried your whole Buddhist thing. Well, I tried giving up meat anyway. When I was 16 I dated a sweet vegan guy called Chris. He made it all sound so convincing at the time. (Love does strange things to people!) I gave it my best shot for three long months. But it REALLY wasn’t for me. I know that in my heart of hearts I have always been – AND I ALWAYS WILL BE – a meat-eater. SORRY!!
In fact, no, NOT SORRY! And this is why I’m writing. When you told us that your branch of Buddhism denounces meat-eating, my blood l i t e r a l l y boiled. Like literally! I wonder if you realise just HOW OFFENSIVE that is??? One of my best friends is studying agricultural science and next year he’s returning to manage the family farm. Do you denounce him?? My cousin Joe works in an abattoir, but HE IS THE NICEST, MOST BUDDHISTY GUY YOU COULD EVER MEET. Do you denounce him????
And just now I Googled Buddhism and found out that many branches of your own belief system ALLOW meat-eating. So not only are you out of touch with the real world – YOU ARE DISAGREEING WITH YOUR OWN WIKI PAGE!!
From personal experience, I know how damaging it is to fight your omniverous desires. When my boyfriend pressured me into veganism I felt guilty, repressed and seriously protein-deficient. Your message is one that makes us hate other people and hate ourselves. And don’t give me that crap about ‘love the meat-eater, hate the meat-eating’! That’s just patronising. In the end it’s just thinly veiled CARNI-PHOBIA.
You gave out your details in case we wanted to find out more about your religion but seriously, NO! I do NOT want to know anything more about your sick, demeaning life-philosophy. You said that if we spent time chatting you could make me understand your position on meat. You said that it fits in with some cosmic understanding of life, the universe, karma, compassion blah, blah, blah. All I know is that I’m a Meat-Eater and if the universe hates me for that then we’ll have to agree to disagree and go our separate ways.
So no, I’m not getting in touch to find out more. I’m getting in touch to say PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE stop the hate-mongering! Meat is food too. Carnivores are people too. And now, if you don’t mind (AND EVEN IF YOU DO!) I’m going to finish my pasty, nom nom!
I really very badly want to share this music. I want to share it with everyone who is willing to hear. And that is because I have fallen in love with this music.
She then describes a low time in which she encountered Handel’s piano music. It sparked her “personal state of wonder. It hit a really deep chord within me.”
“…So that’s how I got addicted to this music…”
Now the world must know! And no matter how foolish she feels, her passion carries her out to the world.
“I ended up with so many diverse reactions. It really made me happy because so many different responses to one and the same piece, to me that feels like it’s really great music.”
The most beautiful moment in performance art is when I can convey my state of wonder at exactly the same moment that you are open to hear it.
Then she plays. (Of course she plays, how perverse to merely talk about the music without offering it to us!). And notice, it’s slow moving in a minor key, then an urgent recapitulation and then a glorious shift into the major key. I wonder why that works?
“Next to the Word of God, the noble art of music is the greatest treasure in the world.” ― Martin Luther
What do we learn about evangelism from this? Discuss.
During mission week at Falmouth CU we showed The Dark Knight Rises. I was going to give a short talk at the end but we had some technical problems halfway through so I gave the talk in the middle instead. Thankfully it didn’t affect the talk too much since it wasn’t based on the plot of Batman but on the concept of myths.
JRR TOLKEIN: ‘The Gospels contain a fairy-story, or a story of a larger kind which embraces all the essence of fairy-stories… But this story has entered History… There is no tale ever told that men would rather find was true, and none which so many sceptical men have accepted as true on its own merits.”
CS LEWIS: “The story of Christ is simply a true myth: a myth working on us in the same way as the others but with the tremendous difference that it really happened.”
Our Words – His Words 2 Corinthians 5:18-21; Luke 10:16
What does it mean to go in Jesus’ name?
.
Prayer for Openings Acts 16:13-15; Colossians 4:2-6; Ephesians 6:19-20
What does it tell you about evangelism that we need open hearts, doors and mouths?
.
We’ve thought about these sentences:
“That’s what I love about Jesus…”
“That problem is far beyond me/us…”
“That’s what I love about being a Christian…”
“That’s what I love about my church…”
.
A Final Sentence Up Your Sleeve
“What’s stopping you becoming a Christian?”
.
Helping Them Make A Start John 1:10-13
Explain that salvation is to know and trust Jesus (it’s a marriage union with Him)
We do this together with His brothers and sisters (talk about church)
We hear His word (talk about the bible)
We speak to Him (talk about prayer)
If they want to receive Him: Romans 10:9-13 – Believe, Confess, Call
.
Who Do I Know Who Needs to Know?
How open are they to me?
1. Nodding acquaintance / rarely see em
2. We talk, not very deeply
3. A friendship is there
4. We could talk about most things
5. We talk about everything
How open are they to the gospel?
1. They don’t know I’m a Christian / Don’t want to know
2. They know I’m a Christian but not much more
3. We’ve spoken about gospel things once or twice
4. They’d come to something / read a book
5. They’re open to exploring Christianity in a deeper way
Spend time thinking of 3 friends and how they might meet with Jesus.
Pray for them and for opportunities to share Jesus with them.
Coming to Christ is like getting to know a potential partner
Questions are involved, but questions are not the be-all and end-all!
At some point you just know enough to trust them.
We reframe the questions around the Bible’s definitions. (You could use 321!)
We reflect the question back because they too must answer it.
We reveal the gospel focused on Christ and Him crucified.
.
DISCUSS these questions using Reframe, Reflect, Reveal…
1) If God is all loving, all knowing and all powerful, how can he allow suffering?
2) Religion simply causes wars
3) How can Jesus be the only way to heaven?
.
A Sentence Up Your Sleeve…
“Can I step back and tell you what Christians believe in 5 minutes…”
.
Problems of the Heart 2 Corinthians 5:10-21
We want to feel ok with the world But Jesus hits a conversation like a sack of bricks.
We want to feel ok with God So I don’t want to get too involved with ‘the world’
We want to feel ok with ourselves But frankly we’re spiritually dry and it feels like a duty.
.
How would the Apostle Paul handle these objections? (2 Cor 5)
.
QUESTIONS
1. What problems of the head do you feel most keenly? How can they be addressed?
2. What problems of the heart do you feel most keenly? How can they be addressed?
3. Can you explain the Christian faith in 5 minutes using jargon-free language? Try it on each other.
Brian Cox wants the Large Hadron Collider to show him ‘the face of the cosmos’. But if that’s what you want, there’s a much better scientific method…
