Part Seven:  Why Word Pictures (“Story Telling”) Can Be a Particularly Effective Evangelism with Today’s Generation

Last week’s blog introduced word pictures as a valuable evangelistic approach, especially in today’s rapidly evolving postmodern culture. Today’s blog will further explain this and provide an example.

Some people are natural-born storytellers. They can take complicated concepts and recreate them into compelling, understandable stories. Some of the most spellbinding and memorable portions of a good sermon are the creative illustrations that vividly drive home the crux of the message. We may forget the Bible passages and the finer doctrinal points, but we don’t forget the stories that illustrate them.

Gary Smalley and John Trent, in their book, The Language of Love, refer to these illustrations as “word pictures.” Visual stories provide insight and understanding into emotionally charged or intellectually complicated issues where raw data fails. The idea is to convey truth subjectively because cognitive communication is ineffective.

In evangelism, I see this to mean that there will be times when we can’t get our thoughts across just emphasizing doctrinal or apologetic facts. Some people will grasp biblical truths more easily through word pictures and personal testimonies. Let me illustrate this.

One of the fundamental biblical principles that must be communicated accurately to unbelievers is God’s willingness to forgive all sins—but not based on how good we may live our lives. Instead, it’s purely by His grace (Eph. 2:8). This can be a difficult concept for many unbelievers to grasp because they believe God accepts us according to our ability to “earn” forgiveness (and hence salvation) through good behavior. A word picture may help us explain that forgiveness is a gift of God’s grace. Here’s an example:

Have you ever seriously offended your spouse or girlfriend, and no matter what you did, you couldn’t get rid of the guilty feeling? You think if you send her flowers and candy, you’ll feel better. But it doesn’t work. You still feel an estrangement that you can’t seem to shake. Finally, one day, knowing your heart and sensing your guilt, she says, “You know, you don’t need to keep trying to earn my forgiveness. I want you to know that there is nothing you can ever do that could earn my love. I forgave you the moment you hurt me because I love you. That’s not something you can earn. It’s something I give you. All you need to do is ask for my forgiveness and accept it. If I didn’t love you, I wouldn’t forgive you, and all the presents and apologies in the world wouldn’t change me.”

Specifically, the value of using word pictures in evangelism in today’s postmodern culture is that many people will be more receptive to evangelism that employs emotive avenues rather than propositional truths. Testimonies, Christian movies, and many Christian novels fall under the broad category of word pictures. ©

Next week I’ll begin a new blog series that focuses on being more effective in apologetics and, by extension, evangelism.  I call this series the “Ten Commandments of Apologetics.”

Part 6:  “Story Telling” (“Word Pictures”) Can Be an Effective Evangelism in Today’s Postmodern World—and Here’s Why“

Christians have always had the challenge of communicating the Gospel to succeeding generations in a relevant and compelling way. Cultures are not static. They are living organisms that constantly undergo dynamic change. No time in history has Western culture undergone such radical changes as it has in my generation. The world of the latter half of the 20^th century was far different in ethics, religion, and social behaviors, from the world of the early 21^st century.

For centuries, Western culture viewed truth as objectively true, adhering to the laws of logic, and attainable. Today, Western culture is rapidly abandoning this traditional “modernist” view of reality. Instead, it is moving toward a postmodern view of reality where truth is relativistic, subjective, and unattainable. Why? Because absolute truth no longer exists in most areas of knowledge—so they say.

Communicating the Gospel or apologetics as a set of propositional statements of truth (facts that can be checked out and verified; truth that applies to everyone) is becoming increasingly ineffective with postmodernists. Past generations of evangelists based their apologetic tactics primarily on Enlightenment thinking. They used logic and the scientific method to verify truth—conclusions based on a preponderance of evidence and rational thinking.  But today’s generation has not been raised in a modernist culture and often rejects reason and objectivity in favor of feelings and experiences. Communicating the Gospel with postmodernists will often require an additional approach.

Today, many evangelists suggest that Christians include storytelling (what I call “word pictures”) to illustrate and perhaps even defend Christian truth claims. As British evangelist Nick Pollard put it:

“[W]e can (and must) work within the methodology of postmodernism if we really are going to reach people in this culture. Two major characteristics of postmodernism are of particular importance to us in evangelism: (1) the emphasis on questioning and (2) the displacement of propositional truth in favor of stories. If we are to be effective within this postmodern culture, then, our evangelism must involve the appropriate use of questions and stories. This is not actually anything new; it is the way in which Jesus taught. He made use of questions, often answering one question with another. And he told the greatest stories of all time.” (Evangelism Made Slightly Less Difficult; How to Interest People Who Aren’t Interested)

Next Week’s blog will explain this concept further, along with a description and example of “word pictures.”

Part Five:  Words and phrases Christians use that will likely sound foreign to non-Christians—and suggested translations.

 Last week’s blog gave examples of the kinds of words and phrases that may sound strange and ambiguous to non-Christians visiting a church for the first time. But how about when we try to explain our faith outside the doors of the church? In this week’s blog, I list Christian terminology with suggested alternative translations (in the adjacent parenthesis) that carry the same meanings but will be more understandable to non-Christians – or you can use them to explain what the Christian terminology below mean.

•  “Fellowship” (Getting together with other Christians)
• “Faith” (Trusting God)
• “Spiritual warfare” (Our struggles against sinful thoughts and temptations)
• “Praise music” (Worshiping God through song)
• “Judged” (How God deals fairly with unbelievers)
• “Saved” (From what? Explain)
• “Hell” (Eternal separation from God)
• “Binding Satan” (Praying for God to protect us from the evil forces in the world)
• “God spoke to me” (Explain how)
• “Indwelt by the Holy Spirit” (God’s Spirit, living in the hearts of Christians, empowering us to live lives pleasing to God and to resist sin)
• “Baptized by the Holy Spirit” (When we first believe, the Spirit of God empowers Christians to resist sin and to serve Him)
• “Father” (Use “God” unless unbeliever is familiar with the concept of Trinity)
• “Son of God” (Use “Jesus” unless unbeliever understands the concept of Trinity)
• “Gifts” (The strengths and talents God gives us to serve Him in particular ways)
• “Rapture” (Believers alive when Jesus returns are taken directly to Heaven without physical death)
• “Born again” (When we become a Christian by receiving Jesus as our personal Lord and Savior, Jesus takes charge of our life, and we receive a new, eternal nature that God empowers for obedience and faith)
• “Resurrection” (Unbelievers need to understand that Christians will receive a physical body and not a spiritual, immaterial body. Be sure the unbeliever doesn’t confuse resurrection with reincarnation.

When we talk to non-Christians and use theological terms such as “atonement,” “justification,” “reconciliation,” “redemption,” “sanctification,” “transformation,” “Trinity,” and so on, we must explain what the doctrines mean. For most unbelievers, used in a Christian context, these words are as foreign as beta particles and quasars are to non-astronomers.

Learning to define these terms is a good exercise for developing your understanding of what they mean. If you don’t understand these concepts yourselves, you won’t be able to explain them to unbelievers. C.S. Lewis put it this way: “If, given patience and ordinary skill, you cannot explain a thing to any sensible person whatever (provided he will listen), then you don’t really understand it yourself. (God in the Dock, 256-57)

Next week we’ll look at the advantages of a seldom considered avenue for effectively communicating Christian truths to non-Christians: WORD PICTURES. What are they and how can we use them.

Part 4:  What Confusing Words and Phrases May Non-Christians Hear the First Time They Attend Church?

Evangelists Jim Petersen observes that Christian evangelists are: “given to extremes. Either we say nothing and let an opportunity slip past us, or we say too much and drive people away.” (Evangelism as a Lifestyle, 110)  I want to add a third communication problem: We don’t use ordinary language. We use words and phrases that are understandable primarily just to other Christians. Let me illustrate how baffling this can be.

Let’s say you invite non-Christian friends to church who have never been to church before. Put yourself in their shoes and try to imagine what it may be like to them.

First, let’s look at prayer. Non-Christians will notice an immediate change in people’s voices. They will often sound more reverent and supplicatory than in regular conversations. Phrases like “bind Satan,” “Lord, touch his body with your healing hand,”  “fill us with your Spirit,” and many other (to a non-Christian) strange soundings utterances are spoken. “Father,” “Son,” and “Holy Spirit” may be used interchangeably.

What word pictures do you think these metaphors may conjure up in an unbeliever’s mind? Three Gods? A lassoed and cinched-up Satan? A bodily God with magic fingers? An apparition moving into a person’s body?

Next, consider the songs they may hear. Many of the lyrics will have no meaning to unbelievers because of the Christian metaphors used: “Standing on holy ground.” “Washed in His blood.” “Blind but now see,” and so on. Again, what strange images can these conjure up in the unchurched?

Then comes the sermon. Once again, an unbeliever may hear numerous unconventional expressions: “You must be born again.” “Living sacrifice.” “Led by the Holy Spirit,” and so on.

Now, I’m not saying these expressions shouldn’t be used. They clearly express our Faith and feelings of love and gratitude toward God. We can’t expect church services or home Bible studies not to use ordinary Christian vocabulary. Nor can pastors and teachers take the time to explain every word or concept that may sound foreign to an unbeliever.

What I am suggesting, however, Christians should try to be selective in the words and phrases they use when engaged in evangelism or apologetics. Indeed, some of the words we employ can convey an entirely different meaning to unbelievers than Christians intend. For example, if someone says they have the “gift” of teaching, an unbeliever may assume he went to college for free. If someone says God “led” them to such and such a decision, a non-Christian may wonder if the Christian actually heard God speak.  My point is, we need to communicate with Non-Christians using everyday language or synonyms—or at least define our terms when they may sound foreign to them.

Next week’s blog will list common Christian words and phrases that may sound strange and ambiguous to non-Christians. I will include suggested alternative terms, synonyms, and phrases that carry the same meanings but will be more understandable to non-Christians.

Part 3:  Effective Evangelism and Apologetics Demand We Avoid Loaded Language . . . Such As:

 More often than not, the words we use and how we say them will count as much in evangelism and apologetics as what we say. This means we avoid loaded language: words and phrases that belittles, mocks or ridicules. As Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli point out,

            An argument in apologetics, when actually used in dialogue, is an extension of the arguer. The arguer’s tone, sincerity, care, concern, listening and respect matter as much as his or her logic–probably more. The world was won for Christ not by arguments but by sanctity: “What you are speaks so loud, I can hardly hear what you say.” (Handbook of Christian Apologetics, p. 23)

Search Ministries produced an excellent workbook on lifestyle evangelism entitled, Connexions; Developing a Lifestyle of Evangelism Among Friends. They point out that  “Only 7% of effective communication involves the actual words. Ninety-three percent of the communication process incorporates the non-verbal components. In other words, how you say what you say is critically important.”

In appendix three of the same workbook, Search Ministries offer the following list of things to avoid saying:

“Beware of these responses. When someone forcefully expresses a view which belittles or puts down your faith, emotions soar and it is easy to respond with these kinds of statements. Here are the discussion stiflers.

• It’s a proven fact that . . .
• That’s just the way it is . . .
• There’s no question about . . .
• Only fools believe . . .
• (Using a condescending tone of voice) The Bible says . . .
• You don’t know what you’re talking about.
• That’s ridiculous.
• Look at the evidence.
• That just doesn’t fit the facts.
• You’re not serious.
• Well, if you believe that, then . . .
• There’s just no evidence for . . .
• That’s been totally disproved.
• Give me a break, that was refuted years ago.
• Hey, if you believe that, you are committing intellectual suicide.
• That’s a self-defeating argument; you’ve just said something that’s impossible.
• You’re being totally illogical.
• How can you even say that?”

The message is clear: Avoid words and phrases that raise people’s hackles rather than opening their minds. In conversing with unbelievers, it is essential to follow the Apostle Paul’s instructions in Colossians 4:6: “Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.”

Next week we’ll see the benefit of using ordinary language when communicating with non-Christians. I’ll illustrate this by putting ourselves in the shoes of unbelievers visiting a church for the first time. What words and phrases may they hear that will sound totally foreign to them?

Why We Should Decode Christian Jargon and Use Everyday Language

When my kids were teenagers, it seemed as if they sometimes communicated on AM while my frequency was FM; my receiver didn’t pick up their broadcasts. They spoke English—but a peculiar kind. Words (in their generation) such as rad and gnarly and boss showered their sentences and required a translation.

Perhaps there’s a lesson here for evangelists and apologists. Could we be using words and expressions that are foreign to unbelievers? Yes, we sometimes do. We need to communicate the Christian messages of salvation and how to have life more “abundantly” (John 10:10) in everyday language. In other words, use words we’re sure unbelievers will understand. In a later blog in this series, I’ll provide many examples of words and phrases to avoid along with suggested “translations” to everyday language.

The Problem

Christianity is no longer the dominant worldview in western culture. More and more, we reflect the traits of a subculture within the larger framework of the secular world. We publish our own books. We read our own magazines. When we can we attend our own colleges and universities. We use certain words and phrases to describe our beliefs and activities. And, perhaps most damaging to evangelism and apologetics, we prefer to associate only with other Christians.

Moreover, like teenagers of every generation, Christians converse in a particular jargon, “hang out” with their peers and socialize in ways attractive primarily to other Christians. Evangelist Jim Petersen gives us a well-heeded warning about this:

        “Christians who keep to themselves, who do not experience a continuing influx of people just arriving from the dominion of darkness, soon surround themselves with their own subculture. Receiving no feedback from people fresh from the world, they forget what it’s like out there. Peculiar language codes, behavioral patterns, and communication techniques emerge that only have meaning for the insider.”  (Christians].  (Evangelism as a Lifestyle, p. 88)

Let’s see how we can remedy this and have a more effective voice in today’s increasingly secular world.

“Be quick to listen, slow to speak” (James 1:19)

The first rule comes directly from Scripture. James’s admonition, applied to evangelism and apologetics, is to listen before you respond. In discussion with unbelievers, there is a tendency to anticipate what they are about to say and be thinking of our response—rather than listening to what they are saying. We need to be good listeners. If we aren’t, we will likely fail to identify hidden assumptions, inaccurate data, misconceptions, or other obstacles to understanding and accepting Christianity. The result is we won’t respond in a way that will turn the conversation away from untruth to truth. A good listener does not interrupt to voice their opinion before other people complete their thoughts.

Next week we’ll look at the second of two more crucial rules for communicating effectively in evangelism and apologetic—along with examples of discussion stiflers.

Part One:  How Not to Do Apologetics—My Story!

Years ago, while living in San Diego, my wife and I became good friends with neighbors across the street. We had a lot in common: We were about the same age, our kids got along well, we enjoyed playing games and going backpacking together.

The wife, I’ll call her “Cindy,” was a third-generation Christian Scientist. Her husband, I’ll call him “Jeff,” I can best describe as I-couldn’t-care-less-about-religion secular humanists. At the time, I was pretty much an “Easter Sunday Christian” (that’s normally when I attended church), and, as far as I knew, Christian Science was just another Christian denomination that liked science!

Eventually, both our families moved out of town. We moved to a rural community twenty-five miles away, and Jeff and Cindy moved to Central California. During the interim between our friends return to San Diego, I became a Christian and returned to college, eventually earning a Master of Arts degree in Christian Apologetics. So by the time Jeff and Cindy returned to Southern California, I knew that Christian Science was a cult—and I was eager to challenge her beliefs.

The opportunity came one evening when we invited them over for supper. After eating, we went outside to sit on our deck. I immediately unsheathed my apologetic sword and plunged into battle. The result was disastrous.

It wasn’t that I failed to give a good account of myself. I cut to shreds Cindy’s erroneous beliefs in Christian Science. She had no answers to my challenges, no rebuttal to my facts. I did my job, all right. In my mind’s eye, she had to admit that at best, she was simply deceived by an inane cult, and at worse, she was a naive buffoon.

She did neither. And we never heard from Cindy and Jeff again.

What went wrong? The problem was me. It was a classic case of “winning the battle but losing the war.” I had all the facts, but that only meant I was half-trained. What I lacked was gentleness (I Peter 3:15b) and communication skills (2 Tim. 2:24-25). Had I used my apologetic knowledge properly, I would have pricked Cindy’s conscience so that she would begin to question her religious worldview. But I would have done so gently, being careful not to inflict a mortal wound. Instead, I chased her away, bleeding and unconvinced.

My tactic was designed to win the argument, not the soul. I failed to create an environment in which the Holy Spirit was free to convict Cindy of the falsity of Christian Science while convincing her (and Jeff) of the truth of Christianity.

I share this story to illustrate a foundational principle of apologetic evangelism: Having the knowledge to refute non-Christian religions and philosophies is not enough. It’s also necessary to challenge false beliefs and present Christian truths so that unbelievers will listen and understand.

Teaching this is the purpose of this new blog series, “Be careful what You Say and How You Say It.” It will provide helpful suggestions on how to communicate so the non-Christians will listen and understand.

Next week I’ll explain a “jargon” problem Christians unwittingly experience as well as the first of three important rules of good communication.

Note:  Each of the five blogs in this series provides examples of offensive apologetic responses to skeptics and other critics. Part ten explains how you can practice these responses in each apologetic category I cover, and therefore be better prepared when your faith is challenged.

Part Fourteen: Responding to Moral Relativism and Religious Pluralism.

1. All religions are just as true and good as Christianity!

• Would you reject child sacrifice as an acceptable religious practice? If so, how can you say that all religions are as true and good as Christianity?
• If your view is correct, on what basis can we condemn the degradation of women practiced in some religions?
• Do you think the traditional Hindu prohibition against reaching out to the so-called “untouchables” is just as virtuous as the Bible’s teaching to help poor and starving people?

2. You Christians have no right to judge other people’s behavior!

• If people can’t judge other people’s behavior, how can laws be formulated to condemn murder and rape?
• If people have no right to judge other people’s behavior, why not torture people for fun on reality television if the public wants to watch it?

3. I think a woman has a right to have an abortion!

• If you were pregnant, what would be inside you—a human or something else?
• If life begins at conception—and science proves it does—the fetus is a human being. Why shouldn’t the law protect an unborn baby just like any other person?
• How can an unborn baby be merely tissue in abortion but a person in the case of fetal homicide laws?

4. All religions are equal—they are just different paths to the same     God!

• How can all religions be paths to the same God when they have different views on the nature of God, the way to achieve salvation, and virtually every other fundamental doctrine?

5. You Christians are so intolerant; you think everyone’s religious beliefs are wrong but yours!

• If you are tolerant, why do you condemn me for having my beliefs?
• You think I’m intolerant because I believe Christianity is God’s only true revelation. Isn’t it a double standard if you’re really tolerant but criticize my beliefs?

 6. It doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you feel it meets your spiritual needs!

•  How do feelings make something true?
• What if you’re wrong? Shouldn’t you at least be willing to check out Christianity?
• Christianity is based on facts, not feelings. Why do you think feelings are more reliable than facts?

7. There are no absolute truths!

•   Are you absolutely certain that’s true?
• If there are no absolute truths, why should I believe your statement, “There are no absolute truths? “

9. Even if truth exists, we can’t discover it!

• Why should I believe that statement if truth can’t be discovered?
• Is that a true statement, or are you guessing?

10. A college professor teaches there are no absolute truths!

• Do you believe what you teach is true?
• Do you give true and false tests?
• Does that mean I can give an incorrect answer to you and still be correct because I believe it is correct?

Next week I’ll begin a new series titled “Be Careful What You Say and How You Say It” It will focus on communicating clearly in evangelism and apologetics

Note:  Each of the five blogs in this series provides examples of offensive apologetic responses to skeptics and other critics. Part ten explains how you can practice these responses in each apologetic category I cover, and therefore be better prepared when your faith is challenged.

Part Thirteen:  Responding to Skeptics Who Claim Jesus Is neither Divine nor Resurrected Using “Apologetics on the Offense” Tactics

1. According to critics, early Bible editors fabricated the stories and sayings of Jesus! 

• Why do you believe that when  innumerable qualified Bible scholars have proven there are no fabrications?
• Where or how are the words or activities of Jesus fabricated?
• Who in particular did the fabrication?

2. Jesus may have been a good man or a prophet, but He isn’t God!

• If Jesus claimed to be God, had all the attributes of God, and performed miracles only God can do; why do you say He isn’t God?
• If Jesus claimed to be God, He either is God or a liar or madman. Tell me, what is there about Jesus that makes you think He is a liar or a lunatic?

3. The Gospel stories about Jesus are a religious myth!

• Since Jesus’ birth, life, ministry, death on the cross, burial, and resurrection were recorded in the Gospels by eyewitnesses or their close companions, why do you think they’re mythical?
• Why do you believe the Gospels are mythical when Bible scholars have demonstrated they are accurate and reliable?  

4. There is no evidence that Jesus rose from the grave!

• Jesus was certified dead by the Roman authorities, buried in a tomb, and later seen alive by hundreds of eyewitnesses—and no one could produce His body. How can you say the resurrection is a myth?
• Please consider these five historical facts. After Jesus was crucified and buried, his tomb was found empty three days later. Hundreds of people saw Jesus after His resurrection. His disciples were transformed from cowardly men hiding from the Jewish authorities to bold, outspoken evangelists before the same authorities who crucified him. The Christian church began around A.D. 30. Sunday became a day of worship for Christians around the same time. If the resurrection is a myth, can you give me a better explanation for these five well-established historical facts?

5. I can’t accept a God who would send people to hell just because they never heard of Jesus. That’s unfair!

•  Where did you hear that God sends people to hell who never had the opportunity to hear about Jesus? Where does the Bible say that?
• You don’t fall into the category of someone who never heard of Jesus. Shouldn’t you be more concerned with your salvation and leave it up to God to deal fairly with people who never heard of Him?
• If someone chooses to reject God, why should God take away their free will and force them to go to Heaven?

6. If people live good lives and are good persons, God will accept them into Heaven!

• How good would you have to be? What are the criteria?
• Where did you learn that? Where did God say that in the Bible?
• How do you know that God saves people based on how good they are?
• What is there about your life that makes you so extraordinarily good that God will let you into Heaven independent of Jesus Christ, which is God’s ordained way for people to be saved?

Next week we’ll respond to religious pluralism and moral relativism

Note: If you have not signed up to join my blog email list, please click on “contact” above and send me your name and email address. You will receive a personal notice when I post a new blog and avoid missing future blogs in this and other series. I do not share email addresses.

Part Twelve:  Responding to Atheists and Skeptics Using Offensive Apologetic Tactics?  

1. I don’t believe that God exists!

• If I gave you evidence that demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that God exists, would there be any reason for you to reject God’s existence? If so, I’d like to know why.
• There is no scientific, philosophical, or logical reason not to believe God exists. So is your disbelief in God just a personal opinion, or do you have some verifiable reason to reject His existence?

2. There is no proof God exists!

• As I see it, there are only three possible ways for the universe to come into existence. It created itself, it always existed, or God created it. Since the laws of physics and logic demonstrate that the universe is not eternal, nor could it have caused itself to exist, do you have another option besides God being the creator?

3. If everything that exists has a cause, God must have a cause!

• Only things that have a beginning have a cause. The God of the Bible is self-existing and eternal. Why would God need a cause?
• If God is the First Cause, what came before “first?”

4. Atheists can be just as morally upright as Christians. We don’t need a God to tell us how to behave!

• True, atheists can be just as morally upright as Christians, but why should they? If there is no God to communicate eternal standards for moral behavior and hold people accountable if they violate those standards, why shouldn’t people do as they please?
• If people disagree over what’s moral and immoral and are free to set their own moral standards – and if God doesn’t exist and set ethical standards – on what basis can we condemn pedophilia or infanticide for people who want to practice them?
• In Western civilization, traditional moral standards have their source in the Judeo/Christian religions. Doesn’t this mean the ethics atheists accept come from God? If not, where did they originate?

5. How can you claim God exists when there is so much suffering and evil in the world?

• For the sake of argument, let’s say that God doesn’t exist. What is your solution to human suffering and evil if there is no God to comfort people in this life and no hope for a future life where there will be no pain, suffering, and evil?
•  If God is all-loving and all-powerful and yet chooses to allow evil and human suffering to remain, He must have a good reason. Wouldn’t it be wise to at least see what that reason is?
• Why do you blame God for evil acts that people are responsible for—such as war, murder, rape, and child abuse?
• What does an atheist say to a parent whose child is dying of cancer? “Gee what a shame.” “Tough luck” “I’m sorry to hear that” (I think it was William Lane Craig who wrote this last response)