No tags yet.
Shortly after becoming a Christian several years ago, I was excited to tell people about Jesus. I immediately began sharing the news of my transformed life with family and friends. There was one fellow that I didn’t know very well personally, but I played tennis with him on occasion. Some of his closer friends told me he liked to get drunk and party on the weekends. When this fellow and I would finish a tennis match, I would get this feeling inside urging me to tell him about Jesus, but each time I would suppress that feeling. I was scared. Why? It just felt awkward to bring it up out of the blue.
About a month later I received terrible news. He had died tragically in a car accident. My stomach sank. My face flushed. Guilt consumed me relentlessly for days. Why? Because I believed this guy went to hell, and it was my fault. Since I didn’t share the gospel with him, he never repented. His blood was on my hands.
I’ve come to realize that many Christians share my experience. In evangelical churches (especially those in rural areas of the Bible Belt), it is common to hear a message preached from the pulpit that if you fail to share the gospel with someone, warning them of hell and the judgement to come, and in the end they go to hell, then you are at least partly to blame. Cartoons like this one I saw on Facebook propagate that very idea.
Is this view biblical? I don’t think so. My goal in this post is to show why. By the end you will see that we are indeed called to be witnesses and ambassadors, but no one goes to hell because of our failure to witness to them.
Evangelism is in the Christian Job Description
The New Testament makes it abundantly clear that Christians are called to evangelize. Jesus said this at the start of his ministry when he called his disciples to be “fishers of men” (Matt 4:19). And he said it at the end of his ministry when he gave the Great Commission:
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matt 28:18-20)
Christians are to be witnesses (Acts 1:8), and ambassadors (2 Cor 5:20). Witnesses because we testify to the truth of the gospel, and ambassadors because when we do so, God is making his appeal through us.
Guilt Driven Evangelism
Many Christians see these commands in scripture and immediately feel overwhelmed with guilt. Why? I think J.D. Greear captured the essence of the problem well when he said, “If every person I see is headed either to heaven or to hell, then shouldn’t I spend every minute of every day interrupting them to make sure they know how to get to God? Don’t they all need to know, right now? If it depends on me, shouldn’t I interrupt them, immediately?”[1]
On this view, the act of witnessing is motivated purely out of guilt. Why? Because God is sentencing people to hell for their ignorance, and it lies within your power to educate them. They don’t know they are headed for hell, but you do. And if you don’t tell them the truth, it will cost them eternity. Look again at that cartoon above. Notice that the unbeliever is ignorant of the cliff that awaits him. He can’t see it, but you can. If you don’t tell him, then he is going to die.
People that take this view to be true do one of two things at this point. Either they go to the evangelism extreme, or the guilt extreme. The evangelism extreme entails getting a picket sign and marching down a street with a megaphone yelling something like “Jesus is the Way. Jesus is the Truth. Jesus is the Life.” Or going door to door hours a day handing out tracts like Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses. The guilt extreme is for the people that don’t do those things. They share their faith occasionally in direct or indirect ways, but because they aren’t as vocal as the guys on the evangelism extreme, they think they are responsible for people going to hell. They are then constantly saddled with guilt and shame.
How can we escape these two extremes? Well, the extremes only follow if guilt-based evangelism is true. But is it? How would a person who holds to guilt-based evangelism defend it biblically? As you will see below, I think their view has three fatal flaws.
False Assumptions, Bad Exegesis, and the Wrong Goal
Guilt-based evangelism makes a false assumption. It assumes that there are people in the actual world who would have believed if you had shared the gospel with them but did not believe because no one shared it with them. Whether you take this assumption to be true or false will largely depend on your answer to the question of the fate of the unevangelized. For example, how do you think God will judge the Native Americans living in 40 A.D., long before Christian missionaries reached that region of the world? I intend to write a post in the future explaining a much more philosophically rigorous answer to that kind of question. But for now, a brief summary will suffice.
Those who go to hell and did not hear the gospel in their lifetime would not have believed even if they had heard it. I have a couple reasons for thinking this.
First, since God is omniscient, he knows how people would respond to the gospel in every situation (via his middle-knowledge). For those who would respond, he makes sure that the message gets to them. I’ll discuss this more in the next section. For those that he knew would not respond, he may not give them special revelation because it would be pointless. It would be like me sending the Queen of England an invitation to my birthday party.[2] I know she wouldn’t come even if I did send it, so there’s no point. But God, in his mercy gives everyone access to general revelation, such that they could know him through nature and conscience (Rom 1:19-20; 2:15). The point is that God does not judge people based on their ignorance, but their knowledge.[3] Whatever knowledge they do have, that is what he holds them accountable for. Notice how different this is from what the cartoon above depicts. The person representing the unbeliever in the cartoon is completely ignorant of the cliff in front of him, and that ignorance is precisely what will cause him to perish. In the biblical account, everyone has access to sufficient knowledge of God for salvation, and he judges them on their response to that knowledge. Unfortunately, most suppress it.
Second, if people existed in the actual world who would not believe on the basis of natural revelation, but would believe on the basis of special revelation, and God never provided them special revelation, then it seems to me that they could rightfully stand before him someday and accuse him of causing them to go to hell. For he did not love them enough to provide what they needed to go to heaven. But God loves everyone (Jn 3:16), and desires that none should perish (2 Pet 3:9). On that basis, I think God will give anyone who would receive Christ the opportunity to do so. People will not stand before God someday and have legitimate reasons for why they did not believe. They will have only themselves to blame for not believing. This is why they will be silent when God holds them accountable (Rom 3:19). They will have no excuse. So, the underlying assumption of guilt-based evangelism is false. There are no people who would have believed if they had access to the gospel but fail to believe because they do not hear it.
The advocate of guilt-based evangelism may respond at this point with two passages of scripture- Ezekiel 3:18-19, and Romans 10:14-17. I think they are badly exegeting both passages. Let’s start with Ezekiel. The guilt-based interpretation thinks that this passage can be applied to Christians today. It sees Christians as watchmen, warning people of the destruction/punishment that is to come. And if we fail to warn people, then their blood is on our hands, meaning we are responsible for them going to hell for eternity. Now, this interpretation is flawed in several ways. If this text is applied to the topic of evangelism today, it is not Christians who are the watchman, but the Holy Spirit.[4] Why do I say that? Well, Ezekiel’s job as the watchman was to warn people of their sin and the coming judgment. Jesus explicitly told his disciples that after his ascension, the Holy Spirit would come and it would be his job to “convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment” (John 16:7-8). Now, the Holy Spirit can use us as one of the means of accomplishing this task, but ultimately the burden to accomplish it rests on his shoulders since he is the watchman, not us. My point is simple. If someone goes without knowing of their sin and of the judgment to come, then the Holy Spirit failed. But he can’t fail, therefore everyone will hear this message one way or another.
Additionally, I am not convinced this passage should be applied to Christians today, or the topic of evangelism. Why? Because the death spoken of in Ezekiel 3:18-19 is physical, not spiritual, and the blood on Ezekiel’s hands is an idiom saying someone is guilty of murder, which isn’t the case for the Christian who does not share his faith. In context, God was telling Ezekiel that if he did not warn the people he would be just as guilty of murder as the Babylonians. It seems to be an overly spiritualized reading to try and apply it to Christians today with regard to their evangelistic efforts. We would not be guilty of murder by not sharing the gospel. We would at most miss out on the reward of being used by God in the process of leading someone to Christ. On the topic of evangelism, I like to think of us as soldiers. God wants to use us to carry out his special mission, but should we decide not to participate, then he will respect our decision and send a different soldier. The mission will still be accomplished, but we will miss the reward and honor of having been a part of the process. I will elaborate on this in the next section.
So what about Romans 10:14-17? Well if you read those verses in isolation, then it certainly sounds like people witnessing to other people is the only way someone can hear the gospel and believe. But if you continue reading the very next verse (v. 18) we see that Paul thinks the message can be preached by more than just a person! In citing Psalm 19:4, Paul is saying that nature itself can deliver the message.[5] And Paul doesn’t rule out other means of delivering it, such as angels, dreams and visions, etc. So, I don’t see this as a successful proof-text in showing that the only way people can be saved is through hearing the gospel from a missionary or a Christian witnessing to them.
I also think guilt-based evangelism has the wrong goal. They just want converts, not disciples. By that I mean that these people just want to give a quick version of the gospel to as many people as possible in the hopes that some will pray a prayer, and that is enough to get them into heaven. There isn’t time to invest in people’s lives, because there are countless other people who haven’t yet heard the gospel, and who is going to tell them if not you? Jesus didn’t conduct his ministry this way. He actually spoke in parables, so as to keep people who weren’t genuinely seeking God from understanding (Matt 13:10-11). He chose just twelve men, and spent years intensely investing in their lives when he could have been visiting more towns, teaching more crowds plainly, to try and get more people into the kingdom of God.
Where Do You and I Come In Then?
After reading and reflecting on that last section there are probably a host of questions flooding your mind. One very pressing question is, “what’s the point in witnessing if the people that never hear the gospel would not have believed anyway?”[6] The question only proves difficult on the assumption that whether you choose to go or not go witness, it would be the same type of person awaiting you. What do I mean by “type of person?” Let me explain.
It seems quite possible to me that there are some people who would not freely believe in any circumstance God placed them in. To help keep these people distinct in this discussion, let’s refer to them as “transworldly damned.”[7] This category of people can be contrasted with those who would freely believe in some circumstances but not others. We can refer to this category of people as non-transworldly damned. These are the two “types of persons” I’m referring to.
Now on my view, God middle-knew before the creation of the world whether you would choose to go witness or not go witness in a certain circumstance. If you would choose to go, then God would potentially place a non-transworldly damned person there, who would be receptive to the gospel message. On the other hand, if neither you nor anyone else would choose to go, then God would potentially place a transworldly damned person there, who would not be receptive to the gospel message. Therefore, we have a good answer to the question “why go witness?” What does depend at least in part on your decision to go witness or not is whether the person(s) to whom you go is/are transworldly damned or non-transworldly damned. If you do not go, it is not your fault that the individual is transworldly damned. It is their own fault. For they would not freely turn to God in whatever circumstance he placed them in. However, if you choose to go, it may be a non-transworldly damned person who could potentially turn to Christ.
In this sense, your evangelistic efforts can only have a positive impact, not a negative one. To paraphrase William Lane Craig, people may be saved through your toil (and the toil of others), but no one will be lost due to your slackness.[8] This runs in stark contrast to guilt based evangelism, which does think you can have a negative impact because people will be lost through your slackness.
There are additional positive motivations for evangelism though. It is this positive view that I call “grace-driven evangelism.”
Grace Driven Evangelism
Grace-driven evangelism really affirms two things- 1) God doesn’t need us, but He wants to use us, and 2) Our real motivation is love, not guilt.
J.D. Greear says that one of the most freeing discoveries he made is that God doesn’t need us.[9] God mocked the idea that we’d ever think he needed something we have when he said through the prophet Asaph, “If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world is mine, and all that is in it…” (Ps 50:12). It is not as though God can only accomplish his mission of getting the good news to people if we cooperate. He can get the message to them without us. However, he wants to use us as his primary means in delivering that message. He wants to make his appeal through us (2 Cor 5:20).
Jesus fed five thousand people with a boy’s meager offering of five loaves of bread and two fish. He could have done the same with four loaves and one fish, or nothing at all. But he chose to let the boy play an important role in a great miracle. Similarly, God wants to use us to play a role in the miracle of salvation. God will get the job done whether we choose to participate or not. It is a privilege and an honor to be used by God though in something so profoundly meaningful, endowed with eternal significance. That is a reward in itself, and that should be enough to motivate us. We don’t need the negative guilt-based motivation. We don’t deserve to play this significant role. But that is the beauty of grace. And that leads to an additional and even greater motivation…grace.
Just as we have experience God’s amazing grace, and the joy and deep satisfaction that comes with it, we want others to experience that as well. That should motivate us to share the good news with others. Because we love them, we want to share the very best with them. And nothing is better than experiencing God’s grace and redemption. To be able to show this kind of love to those hurting and broken is motivation enough. We don’t need this extra baggage of guilt about people going to hell because of us.
The grace-based view puts gives us a positive perspective on evangelism. God is seen as sovereign. We are seen as free. And we get the honor of playing a vital role in God’s plan, while also sharing the love of God with others. That is enough motivation for me, and hopefully for you too.
Where to Start? Keep It Simple
So do not feel the need to force conversation. Rather, be sensitive to the Spirit’s leading. Consciously choose to pray each day that the Spirit would use you in pointing someone to Jesus. Pray that he would give you opportunities and divine appointments, and then be open to them. Does that mean that you are going to lead someone to Christ every day. That may be the case for some, but I think Greg Koukl gets it right when he encourages Christians to just put a stone in someone’s shoe. When a stone is in your shoe, it irritates you until you have to stop and pull it out. Similarly, we put gospel seeded ideas in people’s minds in the conversations we have. We can do this with words and actions. When people talk to us about matters they deeply care about, we can ask thoughtful questions that get them thinking more about God and eternity. To help you have these kinds of conversations more regularly, I highly recommend you read Greg Koukl’s book Tactics.
Conclusion
My bottom line is that we need to be grace-driven rather than guilt-driven. We need to know that God doesn’t need us to build his church. He can do that without us, but he wants to use us in the process. The Holy Spirit is the watchman, not us. He can use us to aid him in that mission, but ultimately the burden of the mission rest on his shoulders. So we need to always keep our hearts sensitive to the Spirit’s leading. We don’t have to force interactions out of guilt, thinking someone will go to hell if we don’t talk to them about Jesus. But we don’t have to dodge the conversation either. Let it flow. Be yourself, and trust that God is sovereign enough to have placed you where you need to be at the right time, and his Spirit will help you say what needs to be said.
Footnotes
[1] Greear, J.D. Jesus Continued. Pg. 76. Emphasis mine. This isn’t Greear’s own view, he is merely describing the mindset of a person who suffers from guilt-driven evangelism.
[2] Jones, Clay. Why Does God Allow Evil? Kindle Location 1559 of 6020. I’ve slightly changed his analogy, but the point remains the same.
[3] I get this saying from Doug Groothuis.
[4] Moyer, Larry. You Cannot Keep People Out of Hell. (Christianity Today). https://www.christianitytoday.com/biblestudies/articles/spiritualformation/070110.html
[5] For an excellent discussion on this text check out Michael Heiser’s book Reversing Hermon pgs 55-70.
[6] I have tried to summarize the thoughts of Dr. William Lane Craig’s article “Should Peter Go To the Mission Field?” here https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/scholarly-writings/christian-particularism/should-peter-go-to-the-mission-field/
[7] Craig refers to them as those who suffer from Transworld damnation.
[8] To be more precise, the most negative effect you can have is causing someone to not be saved. That is not the same as causing them to be lost. For if you choose not to go, God may not create a person who would have been saved. In this sense, we can say that that individual who did not get created was not saved, but neither were they lost.
[9] Greear, J.D. Jesus Continued. Pg. 77.