Random Thoughts: Positive or Negative Examples

Which type of example shows the love of Christ? Which type of example shows our own faults and negatives? Which type of example is more likely to get thru to people? Which type of example is more likely to turn people off to your witness?

I just read this excerpt from Lewis Sperry Chafer, founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, yesterday regarding the "True Evangelism."

Chafer, L. S. True Evangelism. http://bartimaeus.us.
V. -- Dishonor to the Spirit of God

The aim of all public demands in modern evangelism is to terminate indifference and hesitation by a positive decision. But this is sometimes undertaken without due regard for the whole process of preparation by the Spirit for the intelligent exercise of saving faith. Thus the all-important work of the Spirit for the unsaved has often been neglected and the Spirit dishonored in the vain attempt to hasten decisions and to secure visible results.

A true decision must depend upon the action of the will of the individual as he is moved by his own clear vision of his place in the saving work of Christ, and that vision must be created by the Spirit. When this is accomplished, there will be little occasion to argue and plead, and methods which are calculated to force a decision will be found to be superfluous; and any method which is superfluous is usually resented by intelligent people. Such methods create a sense of unreality where there should be a growing reality.

Many serious men have concluded that to send out workers to plead with individuals in a miscellaneous congregation is not only embarrassing to the people thus approached, but is, in the majority of cases, a service which hardens and repels. Forced decisions sometimes follow such appeals. These, they observe, are usually premature and unintelligent decisions; for in such methods there can be no certainty concerning the conviction by the Spirit and no very definite dependence upon His leading. On the other hand, the many who have resisted the personal appeal have been hardened or driven away.

Public methods which embarrass any person or class of persons may be not only useless but intrusive. There is little gained by inviting all Christians in a public gathering to stand, thus forcing all others into a conspicuous position, causing them annoyance and creating an occasion for prejudice. It is not strange that intelligent unsaved people sometimes avoid meetings where these methods are employed. By adopting such a program the evangelist or pastor may be hindering the very work of God which he is attempting to do.

If the spectacular element in public soul-winning is eliminated there will be less opportunity to count supposed results, and the test of conversion will be removed from the sphere of profession and made to rest on the reality of a changed life afterwards.

The sincere evangelist who fearlessly judges, before God, every method he employs -- judging them as to their exact value or possible harm in their influence on immortal souls -- will find that many methods in evangelism are more a habit than a necessity, or that they have been employed in an effort to produce visible results, rather than to create a means by which sin-burdened souls may find rest and peace through a personal and intelligent faith in Christ as Saviour.

I must say that I am tired of people finding other people's faults and advertising those faults to get a point across. Would Jesus have done that? Do these sorts of blogs reach people, or does it just gather like-minded together in their criticism of others not like themselves? Is it really any better than the example that is being criticized?

All I ask is that you seriously ask yourselves these questions before blogging your next negative example. Does it further the Kingdom of God, or does it further the fruit of sin?