Anyone who has been involved in evangelism realizes that time constraints and social factors often make it impossible to communicate the entire gospel with an interested nonbeliever. The social context may be inappropriate for such a dialogue, or you may simply run out of time. It may be that the nonbeliever does not understand a major element of the gospel. Perhaps he does not grasp the implications of his problem and its remedy in Jesus' atoning death, or does not believe that God loves him and is interested in his welfare. In such a situation, it is easy to reason that it would be not only foolish, but also inappropriate to ask for a decision for Christ.

     These are valid concerns and raise an important question that touches on the nature and definition of biblical evangelism. When can we say that true evangelism has taken place? Is it always necessary to share the gospel in its entirety to consider our ambassadorial duties fulfilled? Will our evangelistic efforts always result in reaping (i.e., seeing others make a decision for Christ), or should we expect to do our share of sowing? And what are we to do in those situations where lack of time or lack of personal preparedness of the nonbeliever prevents a complete presentation of the gospel or makes calling for a decision unwise? I believe that a proper understanding of evangelism as both an event and a process will help to resolve this issue.

Evangelism as an Event and Process

    Evangelism as an event could be defined as the communication of the gospel, both in a proclamation or persuasive dialogue context, in such a manner that an informed decision for Christ is appropriately called for. The hearer(s) may or may not be ready to believe, but nonetheless the crucial and decisive nature of the gospel has been clearly, boldly, sensitively and persuasively communicated.

    Thus, we find Peter proclaiming the gospel to thousands on Pentecost and calling for a decision for Christ (Acts 2:14-42). Three thousand responded, but many others probably went away angry at Peter's message or just scratching their heads in confusion. Nevertheless, the event of evangelism had taken place.

     Paul reasoned with a group of Jews and Greeks in Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-4). Some were persuaded and followed Paul and his companions as their disciples (verse 4). Others left without making a decision, and still others left having made a decision to return with an angry mob to run Paul out of town (Acts 17:5-9). Here, the good news had been proclaimed, explained, discussed and reasoned out. The audience knew that a decision was called for. Thus, the event of evangelism had taken place. The number of valid conversions is not the issue, for evangelism is not defined as converting nonbelievers, but as giving nonbelievers the opportunity to make an informed decision to trust in Christ.

     Whether or not people are saved when they hear the gospel is up to God. He alone can convict the heart of sin, lack of righteousness and impending judgment. He alone is capable of confirming the grace, hope and truth of the gospel to the heart and mind of the nonbeliever. As the messenger, I cannot take great pride in many responses or feel bad about few responses. God is sovereign in the matter.

 Evangelism as a Process

     In Acts 18:4, Paul gives us an example of the process of evangelism. In Corinth Paul reasoned with the Jews in the synagogue every Sabbath, with mixed results. The leader of the synagogue, Crispus, believed, but many of the Jews "resisted and blasphemed," until Paul felt it necessary to leave and set up shop in a personal home next door. The point is that Paul kept coming back to explain, clarify and reason with these people. Paul followed much the same pattern in Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-9). Over a period of three Saturdays he reasoned with them, explained and gave evidence that Christ was the Messiah. Luke says that Paul did this "from the Scriptures." The idea seems to be that Paul progressively built a case for Jesus as the Messiah. Thus, his evangelism in Thessalonica could be described as a process.

     I have had many experiences like this. One young man in particular, John, would invite me to sit down with him almost weekly to explain more about Christ. He asked me many times to repeat things so that they would sink in. He asked me more than once to tell him how crucial this issue was and how he really needed to trust Christ as soon as he felt he could make a sincere decision. He was always eager to hear more, but for some reason the gospel never "clicked." He later moved away, and I did not hear from him for a year. Then by divine providence, I'm sure, I ran into him. The first thing he told me was that he had finally put together all the pieces and that he had trusted Christ through the help of a friend in his new church. He thanked me for hanging in there with him. My evangelism with John was definitely a process of sowing, so that another could have the joy of harvesting.

     I would have been greatly amiss had I told John that since he was not ready to decide for Christ I did not have time to talk with him. The fact that a person is not ready to make a decision to trust Christ now does not mean that he is not serious about pursuing the matter. I need to meet him where he is and be a patient 'sower' in his life. I need to answer his questions, listen to him carefully, explain and clarify so that the issue of "Christ and Him crucified" is the only stumbling block to his receiving Christ. Misconceptions need to be cleared away so that the real matter at hand – “What will you do with Christ?" – can take center stage. Understanding evangelism as a process gives me the freedom to do this.

 Some Cautions

     Evangelism as a process, however, must be practiced with some cautions. First, we must be true to the persuasive nature of the gospel message. Look at what Paul did in Acts 18:4. "And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks." Even though he was involved in evangelism as a process, he did not allow the expanded time frame to dilute his sense of urgency. Paul stood ready to be both sower and harvester. The gospel was still to be believed as soon as it was possible for the listener to make an informed decision. He was "trying to persuade." In other words, the process had a specific direction to it. And don't bet that his hearers were oblivious to this fact. They knew exactly where he was headed.

     Paul gave them the gospel information and demands and then backtracked to answer questions and clarify issues. We might say that the process of evangelism took place in the context of the event of evangelism; Paul spoke the gospel with every intention of leading others to Christ (reaping) but with an awareness that in the lives of some he would assume the role of sower.

     Whether evangelism is a 'sowing' process or a reaping event is not so much to be determined by the intention of the evangelist, but by the response of the listeners. For some in Thessalonica, Paul's first Saturday synagogue message was an evangelistic event; an experience of reaping the fruit born by God's Spirit. They believed the first time they heard the gospel. For others it was the first step in a process that took weeks or even months and years. Paul assumed the role of sower in their lives and it would be up to others to reap where he had sown. He appreciated the truth that, at any moment, as he sowed the seeds of the gospel, someone could have his last question answered, his last issue resolved, and he would then be ready to be harvested. The persuasive nature of the gospel demands that it be shared with a sense of urgency grounded in an awareness of this truth. The time for decision is always now.

     The danger is that the process can degenerate into a nonpersuasive dialogue that sacrifices the cruciality and urgency of the gospel for the sake of an expanded time frame. In such a context, it might be easy for both the evangelist and, consequently, the hearer to lose sight of the direction of their interaction. This is unfair to both the listener and the persuasive nature of the gospel.

    It is unfair to the non-believer in two ways. First, the ethics of persuasion ask that we honor a person's autonomy and freedom of choice. A hidden agenda is inappropriate and unethical. The gospel and Jesus Christ need to be the up-front issue if the Christian is to engage the non-Christian in a long-term dialogue or relationship for the purpose of sharing the gospel (see Figure 2). The nonbeliever needs to know what it is he is discussing and the intention of the evangelist before he commits himself to participating in the dialogue or relationship. Second, the crucial necessity of salvation demands that we give the nonbeliever enough information to decide to trust Christ. Some people will be ready to believe the first time they hear the gospel (or the first time they hear it from us), and we dare not tiptoe through the spiritual tulips with them.

     Therefore, I submit that it is appropriate and necessary to make sure that the gospel is explained, the call to decision is given, and the opportunity to decide is given, even in the context of evangelism as a process. This, of course, needs to be done in away that appreciates that the listener may not be ready to take decisive action. I need to remember that even though no decision is made, my persuasive efforts need not cease. I pursue the work of evangelism with the awareness that, in any given situation, I may be a sower or harvester. My witness may be used by God to plant the seeds of the gospel in their heart that another may one day harvest. Or, my witness may be the last link in a chain of events started long ago through the sowing efforts of others, resulting in the non-believer's conversion. The matter is completely in the hands of God.

     With these truths in mind, a proper balance will be maintained between the fact that salvation is crucial and urgent – and thus my witness should provide ample opportunity for decision – and the reality that not everyone is ready for conversion at the same time, or has the same amount of insight into the personal implications of the gospel – and thus my witness may be a seed-sowing experience that sees the nonbeliever moving one step closer to trusting Christ. An understanding of this truth will assist us in our pursuit of being bold yet sensitive communicators of the gospel.

 FIGURE 2

 EVANGELISM AS A PROCESS

THE RELATIONAL MODEL

 NOTE: The varied sizes of the dots illustrate the amount of the gospel that might be given at different times, ranging from almost no gospel content in an initial meeting to the complete presentation at another time. This allows the communicator freedom to backtrack and address specific misconceptions and problems that would hinder a nonbeliever’s response.

 So When Has True Evangelism Taken Place?

     As we can see from our discussion, the element of evangelism as a process makes this a rather tricky question. The unpredictable elements of time and human response muddy the water. Maybe there is no definite answer, but using some of the criteria we have established, we might be able to say when biblical evangelism has not taken place.

     Evangelism has not occurred if less than the essential ingredients of the gospel are presented. First, the declaration of the gospel events: Jesus' death and resurrection. Second, the promise and offer of forgiveness of sin and eternal life. And third, the imperative of repentance and faith in Christ. Thus, if the gospel events are communicated but no call to decision is given, evangelism by definition has not taken place. The good news is good news because it touches on the sinner's present situation of lostness and lifts him out of the awful state of spiritual death. Robbed of the call to decision, the gospel is not good news at all because it has stopped short of touching the sinner's helpless plight with the healing option of conversion. In the patient-cure analogy, announcing to a dying patient that a cure has been found for his illness, at first glance, would be good news. But what if it stopped there? He would continue to lie in bed and eventually die. He must be shown how to make the cure work for him. He must grasp the fact that the cure is for him and will save him. Then the cure must be taken. Evangelism must take the element of decision seriously. It is the door leading to rescue. Therefore, the evangelist. needs to give the nonbeliever enough gospel information so that he has the opportunity to make an informed decision for Christ. Only when this is accomplished has biblical evangelism taken place.