1 example and 1 question.

A young family that I invited to our plant in July of 08 came to our gathering for the first time last Sunday (3/22). The point I want to make is that just because they did not respond to the original invitation this did not keep me from fostering a relationship with them. We have become good friends in the process and they are getting closer to the Kingdom everyday.

Question: Our people understand the importance of building relationships, but are so disconnected from other people at the same time. While many regularly hang out with un-churched people, they have a hard time connecting with people they have not previously known. Any guidance for those who have a hard time simply making new friends?

Maybe we should all go and see Man Date :)

Again, great research. (I'm in the middle of a blizzard so I've got a little time to chime in)

Questions:
--Why do evangelism efforts always seem so church-centric rather than disciple-driven? It feels like church-growth wrapped up in a gospel package...which is not bad, I guess...but it doesn't feel right, either. People can get confused and think this is about getting people to my church rather than getting people into the Kingdom.
--Did the earliest disciples evangelize for the sake of getting people into the church or did the church just happen as a result of their faithful engagement in their world? You guys know the answer to this. But why do we keep creating plans that push us to receive the entire harvest ourselves?

Can I play with a re-wording?

1. Praying--every disciple praying for every lost person. Evaluation--How can you actively pray for lost people?

2. Engaging--Every believer living and sharing an authentic Christian life in both word and deed...no cookie cutter methods...just be who you are where you are. Evaluation--how many people are following and obeying Jesus in every aspect of their lives. (the best training falls flat w/o a real follower)

3. Sowing--Every lost person receiving a complete witness. Evaluation--How are you discerning where people are and sharing with them the complete story of God in the context of an ongoing relationship rather than a one-time shot?

4. Harvesting--Every believer harvesting and celebrating every salvation experience and looking ahead to the ongoing transformation ahead. Are we connecting these people to a church (God-honoring & Bible-centered) where they fit best. Evaluation--Are we hearing regular stories of people crossing the line of faith and connecting to a body of believers that will help them to reproduce this entire process over and over and over.

Thanks, KC. We don't always do "church-centric," as I have written extensively (see Compelled by Love, and, well, just about everything I write... grin).

But, this research asks these type of questions since NAMB is trying to equip churches.

But, don't assume that these few questions are the only ones we asked... more is coming soon. ;-)

And, I will be in class and can't respond, but feel free to dialogue in the comments.

Ed

I definitely know YOUR heart on this....just commenting on this one post and network/denominational temptation to keep growing (and for some 'keep alive') their organizations.

Ed,

I find your research helpful and therefore encouraging. Facts are our friends.

As for evangelism itself, the process usually bogs down for me in the "sowing." Its the making connections with lost people that is hard for myself and many in my church. We're working really hard on that aspect now and beginning to see some fruit.

In the mean time, Keep writing. We need facts, encouragement, ideas, and motivation. All of which you consistently supply.

Thanks for all you do,
Todd

These confirms what seems to have been the M.O. of "church growth" for years. I grew up as a teenage Herb Miller disciple (yes, that means I am a dork of all dorks). He was talking in the 80's about personal invitation as the number one factor. But this also seems to be rooted much deeper in Don McGavern's work Bridges to God- Friendship and Kinship Networks are the ways that the Gospel flows the quickist.

We talk at our church about ads/post cards and such as a supplement but not a replacement for personal faith sharing. In some ways, good ads are like steroids- they help but not in the long run.

Fun story- I launched a new church when I was in seminary- we went all out with OUTREACH.com. Spent tons of money (we had so little) on our launch. Our core group of 20 had 140 people there that first day- 120 of them first time guests! But all the new folks came from ads, and I swear not one person was there from personal invitiation, other than my best friend's mom and dad who came to support me. Guess how many we had the next week? 20! Yeah...I had to keep myself from drinking...

But all that is to say, this research shows what we know, but what are people do not: if they invite there can be a harvest.

What? No Sky Writing? Well, I guess our church plant needs to head in another direction. I do think it is interesting that this supports L. Osborne's Sticky Church theory-- that the real way to get people to stick to a Church is through personal relationships.

A question:

How much should this research (I do not argue with the findings) impact the way we do evangelism? These facts will probably encourage people to stress "relational" evangelism and give up on more confrontational styles like door-to-door, passing out tracts, and open air preaching or witnessing.

But as someone who has done all types of evangelism without seeing a whole lot of results (and by that I mean real conversion, not visitors at church the next Sunday), the only thing that encourages me is that we should probably be motivated by a desire for the gospel to be faithfully proclaimed, whatever the style we use.

People's receptivity to our style of evangelism perhaps should not dictate the style we use. Who knows how the interruption of a door-to-door witness might end up being the vehicle God uses years later to awaken a dead heart that at the time slammed the door in the witness's face.

So again my question: I'm not sure how this information should impact our styles of evangelism, if at all. In short, I don't know what to do with these facts, adjust my styles to them or ignore them.

Hey Ed,

Thank you for the information. This is what we have found in our research as well.

Unsaved people will talk to their friends and family members about Jesus. The problem we find in churches, many believers think they have to know everything about salvation before they are comfortable talking to their family/friends. They think, I may not be able to answer their question or I may say something that offends them.

This is fear based. We teach, if your friend or family member doesn't know Jesus and you say something to "offend" or "upset" him, you have not hurt his eternal position. He was headed to Hell before you talked to him... still on the wide road after your conversation.

We have also found unsaved people are much more receptive to the Good News when the "lost" person starts the conversation.

Quit worrying and start talking, the right words will come.

Why not tell them about what Jesus has done for you and your life, give them your testimony (Revelation 12:11) and let the Holy Spirit do the heavy lifting.

Our job is to proclaim the Good News, God does the saving.

I also think too much emphasis is on salvation (because it's measurable) and not enough on planting and watering.

Not all conversations about Jesus result in salvation, but if the Gospel is shared, it will not return void.

I have found the WOTM (wayofthemaster) to be the most effective for me. Its simple, to the point and very loving to present to a friend or stranger. Its the Law, that convicts thier hearts and shows them thier need for a Savior. As one has said before and I echo his feelings.

The first time I put the principals of "Law to the proud/Grace to the humble" into practice, it was upon myself. I examined my own heart by the standard of the Ten Commandments... my heart sank and then leaped for joy because of the cross. The weight of the Law had crushed me, and the salve of the gospel healed me. The cross made so much sense, my love for God had drastically increased in a matter of seconds, never to be the same, and my ability to share the gospel with my loved ones was revolutionized. I empathized with another pastor who said, "I felt as though I had been born again... again!"

They don't need Church, they need a Savior. Once they see thier need for a Savior, thier life boat, thier Rescuer, they will start looking for a church body.

And the reason people dont share thier testimony in my opinion is that many of them dont have anything to share. Its sad that many "professing" Christians really dont KNOW God. If they really did, they wouldn't stop until thier friends heard the Word, the word of Hope and Redemption.

The ideal of "friendship" evangelism scares me. We are to be witnesses but at the same time, how long are we to be friends with someone before we share the Love of Jesus with them? The hardest person in the world to witness to is a friend or family member. If we are thier friend, we should be concerned about thier eternity the day we meet them. Now, thats Love. Not, WWJD, but WDJD, What did Jesus Do? He gave grace to the Humble and the Law to the Proud. TODAY, not tomorrow is the day of salvation! Now, Lets Roll!

That's what they SAY.

I'm just thinking about the margin of difference between what people say in a survey like this and what they really feel. Because when it boils down, even if people hate church and God and religion they still want to feel like they are good open-minded people. So when you hear the question, "Are you willing to hear information about a church from a family member?" what kind of jerk would say, "No, I am not even willing to listen to my MOM talk about her CHURCH."

If I read the stats right 37% say I am NOT "somewhat or very willing" to hear a family member talk about church. How many of the 63% were fudging just so they would feel better about themselves and appear open-minded?

To me this data speaks about how badly the church has alienated people (I know that's not the only thing or the main thing it tells us, but it is something that sticks out to me).

However, I do like that this research shows us that individual relationships must remain the priority in outreach. It helps us know that personal invitation is not a bad investment of time, even though the short term payoff is sparse. I think Geoff's example illustrates that.

This article is very effective method to Ivite people to my chuech,and to receive information about a local church.Tankyou very much !

Is it possible that one of the main reasons for the resistance to this approach to Evangelism is based on some Pastors and believers not taking time to develop actual relationships with lost people? We pack our "church calendars" so tightly that we do not give ourselves or our people much time to actually get to know the very people we are attempting to reach. And if our people don't see and hear us talking about the people we are connected to, they will most likely follow our example and not our words!

Start in Matthew and read about how Jesus did it. Its simple and to the point. I cant see any "friendship evangelism" here. Question..How long do you have to know someone before you share Christ with them? "Today is the day of Salvation".

The focus of our lives and where God has placed us must be understood in terms of our mission (The Great Commission). I'm all for building relationships with the lost. But do we build our Evangelistic practices based on what they (lost world) like or on what God commands? I'm not being dismissive of understanding our culture and how best to communicate with them. But what do we want? The most God Glorifying message in all of Scripture is the proclamation of the Gospel. The message the Apostle Paul stated was of 1st importance (1 Co. 15). So I say yes build relationships that are Christ focused and yes proclaim the Gospel at a doorstep and yes to proclaiming it to your family members and to all who will listen. I wasn't a math major but if we do all that does it equal a 100%.

May God find us all faithful in proclaiming the person and work of Jesus to a lost and dying world.

In the words of our Savior – (Mark 1:15) and saying. "The time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the Gospel."

My experience has been that very few people have a problem with Jesus or talking about him. A lot of them want nothing to do with church though.

The thing that has frustrated me from childhood is that we talk about evangelism and inviting people to church synonymously. I know this sounds weird coming from a church planter, but the last thing people need is to attend a church service. What they do need is Jesus, so why do we tell people to invite people to church? Is it because we are afraid to tell them about Jesus and how he has changed their lives?

Ed,
Chan Kilgore is my church planting coach in Central Florida and he has led me into a three step strategy. Intercede, Invest, Invite. In fact I believe in this so much that I tattooed three boxes on my arm with scripture to remind me of the lifestyle I am to live as I seek three people in my life to intercede, invest, and invite. It has kept this simple approach to planting the gospel in our community before us everyday.

Ed,

Very interesting data. It did leave me with one large question. Was there any question about current church attendance? Quite frankly I am not interested if my neighbor who attends the local Presbyterian church would be interested in an a church invite. It is the neighbor who attends no church that I want to know about.

On a slightly different tack. My parents church when it was fairly new did "The Phone's for you" campaign which was fairly successful in terms of response. What they did find is that those who responded already had a relationship with someone in the church. So, although this was an indirect invitation, it was still worked because of relationship building.

Agreeing with the conclusion, I'll offer one observation:

These surveys are interesting and not all that surprising to me. Hopefully the note below is understood as perspective and not adversarial.

There seems to be an obvious correlation between the survey for The Top Five Ways People are Most Willing to Receive Information about a Local Congregation, otherwise stated in the synopsis as - "the most effective method for bringing people to church"(little "c"), and the use of an invitation to "attend church" as a primary evangelism technique today.

I'm certainly not implying we should not invite "unchurched" people to our place of worship, but its interesting how many churches still use this technique as the key to "relational" evangelism, partly because we've trained them that way. Relationships, should certainly include, but extend beyond the right to invite someone to church, to the right to share a personal testimony and the Gospel in and outside the church building, which we are called to do.

Equally as intriguing to me was that the next survey did not reveal "during a local church service" as one of the top five times unchurched people are more likely to consider matters of faith. I've got to believe that "during a church service" is a valid time frame if we include seasons (Christmas and Easter) and events in history.

So on the one hand, many churches are inclined to get people to their church as effectively as possible to "evangelize" them, but the survey would indicate that is not a top time of receptivity from an unchurched person. So my question is: Aren't these surveys, assuming they are correct, pointing to an evangelism dichotomy within the local church?

I'm not convinced the average unchurched person literally has any idea what is the best time is for them to be receptive to discuss spiritual matters, if we're talking about their acceptance of Christ. I do believe, even if its not listed, that services from a church constantly proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus, should make it to the top 10 list. We still act however, like it is number one.....and I'm not sure it is.