The Message of the gospel is specific and clear – Christ died for our sins. God’s designated Means of transmitting the message is ‘preaching’, or ‘telling’ others the message – it requires words. What about the Method, or ‘process’? Guess what? There isn’t ONE! There a multitudes of ‘tools’ like the ‘Romans Road’, ‘The Four Spiritual Laws’ (Campus Crusade for Christ), ‘The Bridge’ diagram (The Navigators) and countless evangelism pamphlets and tracts. There are also different approaches from the ‘cold’ approach used in door-to-door and street evangelism, group evangelism in a corporate setting, to one-on-one relationship based evangelism. I would also offer that although there are those are called and gifted for the ‘office’ of evangelist in the church, we are all called to ‘be ready to give an account for the hope that is within us’ (2 Peter 3:15).
Although there is no single method that is to be used for sharing the good news, we can examine the growth of the church in the New Testament and find some invaluable guidance concerning ‘how’ we are to share the good news. The following two sections of this post are excerpted from The Stewardship of God’s Truth Through Evangelism, by J. Hampton Keathley, III , Th.M.
Oikos Evangelism
What is oikos evangelism? Oikos is the Greek word most often translated house or household in the New Testament. But let’s be careful and not assume we know what that means. In the culture of New Testament times, oikos described not only the immediate family, but it included servants, servants’ families, friends, and even business associates. One’s oikos was one’s sphere of influence, his/her social system composed of those related to each other through common kinship ties, common tasks, and common territory. The New Testament oikos included members of the nuclear family, but extended to dependents, slaves and employees. The oikos was the basic social unit by which the church grew.
An oikos was the fundamental and natural unit of society, and consisted of one’s sphere of influence—his family, friends and associates. And equally important, the early church spread through oikos—circles of influence and association. With only a moment of reflection, we begin to realize a significant difference of thrust, tone, and tenor between much contemporary evangelism and early church outreach.
As we turn to the New Testament, Scripture focuses us on the household (family, friends, and associates) in the spread of the Gospel to mankind. The Gospels, Acts, and Epistles illustrate that the link of communication from person to person was the oikos. Here was the bridge used regularly as a natural means for spreading the message of Jesus Christ.
The following passages are illustrations of Oikos evangelism
· Mark 5:19. “Go home to your people (oikos) and report …”
· Luke 19:9. “Today salvation has come to this house (oikos).”
· John 4:53. “… and he himself believed, and his whole household (oikos).”
· Mark 2:14-15. We can’t be certain, but “his house” probably refers to Levi’s. If so, Levi invited his friends to come and meet and hear Jesus. Here is a typical household bridge—the inclusion of associates within the confines of Levi’s own home.
· John 1:40-45. The Apostle Peter came to Christ as a result of someone in his oikos. And Nathanael came to Christ because his friend Philip told him about the Savior.
Following Christ’s resurrection and ascension, it was this same pattern of the Gospel moving through the oikos which caused the early church to explode. Noted church historian Kenneth Scott Latourette has observed that, “the primary change agents in the spread of faith … were the men and women who earned their livelihood in some purely secular manner, and spoke of their faith to those whom they met in this natural fashion.”
· Acts 10:22f. Cornelius invited his relatives and close friends (his oikos) to come to his own home to hear Peter tell about the Lord.
· Acts 10:15 and 31. Here two households came to know the Savior through the influence of Lydia, a business woman, and the jailer at Philippi. When most people read about these two incidences, they normally think of just the immediate family. It was probably much more.
It seems that Oikos evangelism is the God-given and God-ordained means (method) and key for naturally sharing our supernatural message. This is the way the early church spread and it is the way the Gospel is most naturally shared today. Research and statistics back up this claim. (75-90% of new believers come to Christ because of a family member, friend, or associate having shared the ‘good news’).
The Spiritual Principles at Work in Evangelism
As the Bible uses analogies to teach spiritual truth, so it also uses analogies to portray the process of reaching men for the Lord. These include pictures taken from the harvest—the seed, the sower, the soil, and reaping the harvest. The soil is the human heart, the seed is the Word of God, the sower is the believer with the seed of the Word, and the reaping is when a person comes to Christ by faith. Based on this analogy, there are four things involved in the process:
Preparing the Soil
The soil of the human heart must be prepared. This is done through:
(1) Walking by the Spirit (Acts 1:8; 4:31; Eph. 5:18)
(2) Praying for four things: (a) for laborers for the harvest (Luke 10:2); (b) for open doors or opportunities (another analogy) for the Word (Col. 4:3); (c) for courage to share the Gospel at the right time (Eph. 6:18; 4:29); and (d) for clarity: the ability to make the Gospel clear (Col. 4:4)
Living to Demonstrate the Power of Christ
Simply put, the problem is this: You can’t give away what you don’t have. If we as Christians lead lives of frustration, neurosis, moral lapse or failure, strife and division, we cannot expect to be too effective at convincing others of the truth of the Christian faith. (Cf. Col. 4:5-6; 1 Pet. 3:15-17.)
Sowing and Watering the Seed
We have the responsibility to share the message, to communicate the truth of Scripture in accord with specific needs knowing and believing that the Word is alive and powerful and will do the work God has sent it to do (Isa. 55:8-11). While a good testimony is essential and is often used by God to give an open door for the Gospel, no one can be saved without hearing the Gospel message. (Cf. Mk. 4:1-20, 26-29; John 4:35-42.)
Reaping the Harvest
The harvest is people receiving Christ by personal faith. Evangelism is a process that brings a person to a decision to trust in Jesus Christ, but evangelism is not just a decision. In our work with people, we become a part of the process of preparing, sowing, watering, or reaping, but we can’t hurry the process. We must learn to care about people just as did the Lord. Then, when the right time comes, as led by the Spirit, begin to tell them about the person and work of the Savior. We must remember that, in the final analysis, God uses the Word and the transformed life, but it is the Spirit of God alone who can break through the barriers of the blindness and hardness of the human heart to bring a person to faith in Christ. (Cf. John 4:35-42.)
I don’t think there is much I can add to that except ask you to read through the above post again and highlight all of the references to the work of God in salvation, whether it is the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. When you have done that, with a ‘here I am send me’ heart, seek God concerning His specific plan for you in sharing His Good News.
“Salvation is of the Lord.”—Jonah 2:9.
The Battle Cry 
Excellent Bro!
Well put together and said.
Thanks,
Richard
LikeLike
I must have had several drafts of what I wanted to say and found Dr. Keathley said it all much better than I would have!
LikeLike
I don’t get the whole “warfare” in the context of spirituality, which is something that is supposed to be peaceful. Can you please explain how evangelical christianity has anything at all to do with the teachings of Christ, the man? As far as I have read, there is not one thread of commonality between your little “warfare” and the life of Christ.
LikeLike
Steve,
Here it is, from the Apostle Paul, in the context of evangelism:
Ephesians, Chapter 6:
10Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
18Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
19And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
20For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.
Does this help?
LikeLike
Steve: Christianity is not just about securing a place in heaven after death, it is yeilding our lives to the Lord and the enemy fights against us doing so every minute. This scripture that Dan has given, especially vs. 12 is excellent in how to clothe ourselves with the full armor of God. The enemy has already been defeated but will continue to try to take others down…he’s a leech and so lacking in life that is seems the only life he has is what he can suck out of the living.
Scripture uses warfare language, so i think it would be wrong to reject it, and those going through such struggles sooner or later find themselves on war-like terms. It’s more than just a struggle…
Every child of God is promised victory over Satan:
Isaiah 54:17, Malachi 4:3, Luke 10:9, Romans 8:38-39, James 4:7, 1 John 4:4.
It’s important that we recognize who our enemy is and his tactics…2 Corinthians 2:11
There is so much more to this, but I hope this helps 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks for that, Deb. There will be battles, but the war has already been won at the Cross. Those are pretty good odds, I would think.
LikeLike
I’m hoping some time this week I’ll be able to read this and comprehend it…not that it doesn’t look wonderful and perfectly stated…just my brain on hold.
I love you, Dan and am so thankful for you speaking the truth day in and day out.
😉
LikeLike
Dr. Keathley said it so well and there is more in the portion of the his work from which this post was excerpted. I was struck by the statement “You can’t give away what you don’t have.” It speaks to why some folks have a hard time with sharing their faith,I think. If there are individual or corporate ‘sin’ issues we won’t be effective. For those who profess Christ but don’t possess Christ, there can be total resistance to ‘using words’ at all.
Enough of my opinion….love you too Michelle!
LikeLike
“It seems that Oikos evangelism is the God-given and God-ordained means (method) and key for naturally sharing our supernatural message. This is the way the early church spread and it is the way the Gospel is most naturally shared today. Research and statistics back up this claim. (75-90% of new believers come to Christ because of a family member, friend, or associate having shared the ‘good news’).”
This paragraph underscores the imperative to be in relationship with people; that the relationship pre-exists; and that it includes our sphere of influence – family, friends, co-workers, neighbors.
The “preferred” method, if you will, is that everyone should be introduced to the Savior by a close friend – you could even say a mutual friend.
Good stuff.
LikeLike
Steve – Thanks for the thought provoking question. Let me take a stab at it:
The warfare that is spoken of in the NT is a spiritual warfare between Jesus’ followers and Satan. The verse that Dan quoted tells believers how to be prepared to ‘do battle’ against the dark forces – Satan and his followers. The 12th verse states specifically, “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” That would be Satan and the fallen angels that chose to follow him.
A very common error amongst those engaged in evangelical Christianity is to translate this battle into human form. The enemy then becomes those that do not align themselves with Christ either by profession (like an atheist) or by moral behavior (pick your favorite sin). The extreme example would be the Christian that blows up an abortion clinic, or assassinates an abortion doctor; or the “God Hates Fags” sign carriers. There is much more ‘acceptable’ forms of this hatred practiced by many evangelical Christians – “I don’t go to those kind of parties”; “I wouldn’t be caught dead going there”; “I don’t associate with those kind of people”; or “I’m a Republican.”
I’m sure you could add a few examples of your own, but the message of Scripture is clear: this attitude is sin. Paul sums it up like this:
“The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.”
The heart of Jesus is for us to turn away from ourselves and back to God. Jesus became human so that he could communicate to people that God loves them and wants a restored relationship with them. Jesus himself said, “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.” [Luke 19:10] Jesus also paid the price for our sin (our turning our back on God) by dying on the Cross for our sin.
Paul writes to the Philippians, “And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!” [Phil 2: 7-8]
Now Jesus also said, “…you will hear of wars and rumors of war.” So I don’t mean to imply that there will not be continued violence in the World, but that it should not come at the hands of a follower of the Christ.
You are correct in your assertion of Jesus’ teachings which can be summed up simply in his command to “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” [Matt. 5:43]
LikeLike
Bad,
“This paragraph underscores the imperative to be in relationship with people; that the relationship pre-exists; and that it includes our sphere of influence – family, friends, co-workers, neighbors.”
The statistics to which you refer in NO way establish that a relationship is an ‘imperative’ before sharing the gospel. Evangelism is most effective when there is also human relationship, and often does not exist at all. The ‘imperative’ assertion is also not scripturally and in error. You seem stuck on the absolute necessity of a relationship. A rudimentary reading of the New Testament proves that false.
Your arguments concerning ‘human forms’ of spiritual warfare are weak. Some activities like those of the hateful radicals that would blow up abortion clinics and/or carry hateful signs are inexcusable and will be judged – they are not valid spiritual warfare. Not engaging in certain activities/behaviors that would damage our Christian witness or cause a brother to stumble are not ‘human forms’ of spiritual warfare, unless victory over those things is a result of individual spiritual warfare. Your argument is untenable. They could be God glorifying behavior modifications (good) on one end, or legalistic endeavors (works-righteousness-wrong motive, on the other end).
“The heart of Jesus is for us to turn away from ourselves and back to God. Jesus became human so that he could communicate to people that God loves them and wants a restored relationship with them.”
Jesus came to die in our place for our sin that deserved death, in obedience to His Father, according to His Fathers will and for His glory, first and foremost…SO THAT we could have a restored relationship with God.
“Jesus also paid the price for our sin (our turning our back on God) by dying on the Cross for our sin.”
‘Turning our backs on God’ wrongly defines the extent of the sin problem. Our sin is inherited from Adam-original sin and depravity-evidenced by the ‘sins’ we commit.
“Now Jesus also said, “…you will hear of wars and rumors of war.” So I don’t mean to imply that there will not be continued violence in the World, but that it should not come at the hands of a follower of the Christ.” (
Nonsense. God raises up governments to restrain evil, which often requires violence.
“You are correct in your assertion of Jesus’ teachings which can be summed up simply in his command to “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” [Matt. 5:43]
Steve didn’t even make that assertion. He just mistakenly thinks that ‘things spiritual’ are supposed to always be peaceful. He probably has not read much of the Bible for himself. At any rate, that is not a ‘summary’ of Jesus teachings. Even if you meant the two commandments that spoke of loving God and our neighbors, there it speaks of those two commandments in the NT changing our motive for obeying the big 10 in the OT. One might say that John 17:3 (“Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”) better summarizes the whole of Jesus’ teachings. Everything else falls into place as we increase in our knowledge of God, both scripturally and relationally.
LikeLike
Dr. Keathley also states, “In our work with people, we become a part of the process of preparing, sowing, watering, or reaping, but we can’t hurry the process. We must learn to care about people just as did the Lord. Then, when the right time comes, as led by the Spirit, begin to tell them about the person and work of the Savior.”
This statement underscores that you don’t always lead with any particular words – again, there is implied (important) relationship at work here, and Jesus is our role model.
LikeLike
Bad,
The gospel is shared most effectively in the context of natural human relationships, most certainly, but I’ve seen ‘relationship’ take priority over the message (the words).
God is presented as having as His first priority His relationship with humans,instead of His own glory. We become the center of God’s universe, instead of Him being the center of ours. Christianity then becomes man-centered instead of God-centric, the ‘cancer’ that has been eating away at the church for decades.
I realize that I have not given ‘relationships’ the level of attention you would have wanted, but let me ask you, whatis most important for that person with whom you have a relationship, that he/she have a nice relationship with you, or that he/she has met Christ as Savior and Lord?
I sat in a meeting with a Chaplain on Ft. Carson and a leader of a parachurch ministry involved in singles and couples ministry. I became aware of the material being used for those bible studies only because I asked spedifically. It was never mentioned in the Sunday bulletin, but just call so-and-so if interested. I took a look at the book being used and discovered faulty doctrine verging on the heresy of Open Theism. I suggested a particular set of inductive study materials devoid of ‘third party opinions/doctrines as one of the ministry ‘tools’ available to chapel menbers. I was told by that parachurch ministry leader “we’re not interested in content, we want to get people together”.
Since when does ‘relationship’ become more important than truth itself? You would be hard pressed to find as great an emphasis on ‘relationship’ in the bible as you seem to espouse. Sadly, ‘thou shalt establish warm relationships’ has become almost the first commandment of evangelism these days. I have seen it over and over.
I have also seen the enemy using an overemphasis on relationship as a stalling tactic to prevent the ‘telling’ of the work and person of Christ.
While you are busy building relationships, where in your heart and mind is the need to speak of Christ with that person? Is it in the forefront of conscious thought, or somewhere on the back burner (or off the stove) as you concentrate on that person liking you before you share the words of the Gospel, or even discuss ‘things spiritual? You don’t have to answer, I am just asking.
Perhaps the whole point about method is that in the context of natural human relationships should be the priority ‘arena’ in which we share the truth of the gospel, but we should also be available and ready to ‘give a reason for the hope that is within us’ (1 Pet 3:15), to anyone we meet?
LikeLike
Don’t see any original thought up there, Bad.
LikeLike
Actually, that deserves just a little more attention.
For the spectators, have you noticed that Bad’s criticisms never, ever apply to himself? Have you noticed that the substance he demands of others in the matter at hand is absent in his own offerings? Have you noticed that when others offer substance Bad scoots by as if nothing was said?
Is there any Scriptural reason that these musings should be taken as the imperative – indeed, in the stead of the voluminous Scriptural evidence provided in opposition to his theses – for which Bad says he is searching?
I don’t think we will ever know.
LikeLike
Hey Dan – please check your spam bucket. I have a longer response that I think ended up there.
LikeLike
OK Bad, I found your other comments and replied to some.
“Maybe imperative is too strong a word, maybe it’s not. Let’s stick to the words that Dr. Keathley used: “God-given”, “God-ordained”, and “key”. The importance of relationship is clear; maybe that’s the word that I should have used – importance.”
Good call.
“They could be God glorifying behavior modifications (good) on one end” – according to Jesus, behavior modification is not a good thing – read Matthew 23. The motive for these actions is certainly the question.
It was hard to see your motive issue in your comment. Matthew does not say modifying one’s behavior is not a good thing, as you state “according to Jesus, behavior modification is not a good thing” sounds a bit ridiculous. The passage refers to performing ‘works’ merely to be seen by men is the wrong motive. My reference to behavior modification went to a believer changing his/her behavior patterns because of Holy Spirit conviction or scriptural admonition,which is a VERY good thing.
““Jesus came to die in our place for our sin” – True, but Jesus also said that he came to seek and to save the lost. His words – not mine. “”Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.””
Your ‘but’ might not be the best word – it sets up contrast. Jesus’ dying for our sin, in our place is exactly ‘how’ he saved and today saves God’s elect who had been ‘lost’ (jew and Gentile) because of the sin of Adam.
“Nonsense. God raises up governments to restrain evil, which often requires violence.” – How does this statement involve Christ followers?”
Duh… Christians serve honorably in the armed forces and by necessity are involved in violence. You said “(violence) should not come at the hands of a follower of the Christ.” On it’s face it doesn’t make sense. Maybe you meant to say Christians should not perpetrate violence?
Jason,
He didn’t actually ignore some stuff – it was in my spam bucket.
LikeLike
my Bad presumption.
LikeLike
Jason,
I found it and quoted parts of Bad’s comment and my reply in ont time, above your last.
LikeLike
Bad,
“maybe imperative is too strong a word, maybe it’s not.”
Still with the word games?
“according to Jesus, behavior modification is not a good thing”
I can’t figure out how you could possibly come to that conclusion. Christ actually says about the religious leaders, “do all that they tell you, do and observe.” in Matthew 23. This is how the Chapter opens, so at the very least it is a significant part of the context and framework of what follows. Your statement would render Christ’s words meaningless, presumably not your goal.
“““Jesus came to die in our place for our sin” – True, but Jesus also said that he came to seek and to save the lost”
How could these possibly be in opposition, or at least separate activities, as you have presented? Bad, these two are the same activity…unless you are applying a heretical liberation-theology hermeneutic to the work of Christ. And if you are employing such a false hermeneutic, then your use of “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.”” is wildly out of context. “Son of man” is used by Christ about himself in a way which makes liberation theology impossible.
““Nonsense. God raises up governments to restrain evil, which often requires violence.” – How does this statement involve Christ followers?””
Luke 3:14 14 Some soldiers were questioning him, saying, “And what about us, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not take money from anyone by force, or accuse anyone falsely, and be content with your wages.”
The Baptist, in response to the soldiers’ question about repentance, does not say that their soldier status is a problem.
When the Centurion, meets Christ and askes for help for his servant, and displays great faith, Christ says nothing to him about his being a Centurion.
In Acts 10, cornileus’ centurion status is not at all a problem.
Now the likelihood that centurions had not seen battle or committed some violence in order to maintain pax romana is nil. But in all of the narrative examples, their soldier status is not a problem, and in didactic passages on matters of governments being raised up by God, obedience to these are also not a problem.
Dan’s statement involves Christ followers in that there is no reason to think a person’s soldier status and Christian status are necessitously in opposition.
In fact, if one looks at Romans 13, and then realizes that people comprise governments (not a surprise to you, nor a problem to receive a government paycheck, obviously), you saying that, “So I don’t mean to imply that there will not be continued violence in the World, but that it should not come at the hands of a follower of the Christ.” is to say that those involved in Romans 13:3 “not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil.”, are presumed by you to be actually partaking in evil, you find yourself in oppostion to this passage as well as the implicit vocation in the narrative passages above.
LikeLike
Good stuff, Jason….
LikeLike