The New Testament data on the theology and practice of evangelism should serve notice to the Christian that these truths must be incorporated into one's life. Such is the task of developing a personal philosophy of evangelism.

 We might define a philosophy of evangelism as a consistent, biblically informed pattern of communicating the good news to those outside of the kingdom of God. We are commanded to be faithful to our Master and bring glory to His name by bearing much fruit in the work of evangelism. Therefore, a philosophy of evangelism is not a luxury reserved for those given to theological contemplation. It is a necessity for every Christian.

 I believe that there are three essential questions we must ask, for their answers form the foundation for a biblical philosophy and practice of evangelism:

 (1) Does the New Testament teach it? Is my approach to evangelism grounded in theological convictions regarding salvation, the gospel and evangelism? Is it grounded in the certainties of God's plan to redeem a lost creation, the lostness of man and responsibilities of our
ambassadorship ?

 (2) Did the first-century church demonstrate it? Has my philosophy and practice of evangelism been modeled by the first-century church? Have the theological realities that drove the first-century church to proclaim the gospel with boldness and sensitivity caused me to develop similar patterns for communicating my faith?

 (3) Does it work? Does my philosophy and practice of evangelism make me effective in getting the gospel out to as many as possible, as soon as possible and as clearly as possible?

 Our personal approach to evangelism must be grounded in a concern for biblical theology, biblical practice and biblical effectiveness.

 Boldness in Evangelism

 I believe that a biblical philosophy of evangelism will compel us to commit ourselves to boldness and to taking the initiative. What does it mean to be bold in evangelism? Does it mean to drive through the streets of your town announcing the gospel through a bullhorn? Should you stand up on a table in your cafeteria at work and challenge the audience to repent and believe the gospel? Is it modeled by someone like John the Baptist crying in the wilderness, or Stephen just before he was stoned, or Paul before he was run out of the synagogue?

 Unfortunately, the mental images conjured up by the words "bold" or "aggressive" are usually associated with conflict and confrontation, or with awkward social situations that offend nonbelievers. But the concept of aggressive evangelism deserves better. It must be lifted out of the pit of misunderstanding and emotional considerations and placed in its proper biblical context.

 Biblical Boldness

 The Greek word for boldness is parresia, meaning "outspokenness, frankness, plainness of speech that conceals nothing and passes over nothing."1 The verb parresiazornai means "to speak boldly" and is always used in the New Testament in connection with speaking the gospel message.

 This word is used in Acts 9:27 ,28; 13:46; 14:3; Ephesians 6:19,20; and 1 Thessalonians 2:2 to describe Paul's courage and confidence as he preached the gospel at the risk of great personal harm. This same word is used in Acts 18:26 and 19:8 to describe the great openness and clarity with which the gospel is meant to be spoken. Thus, to be bold in evangelism means to speak the gospel courageously, confidently, openly and clearly, free from the constraints of shame and the fear of opposition.

 Paul's ministry to the Thessalonians is a perfect example of boldness in action (1 Thessalonians 2:1,2). His visit to Thessalonica, with Silas, had been preceded by great personal suffering in Philippi, where both men had been beaten, flogged and jailed for their proclamation of the gospel (Acts 16:12-40). As one commentator puts it, "Still staggering from these injuries and indignities, the two came to Thessalonica. Under such conditions most people would have refrained from repeating a message that had led to such violent treatment, but not these men. With God's help, they mustered sufficient courage to declare in this new city their gospel from God."2

 The New International Version translates 1 Thessalonians 2:2: "With the help of God, we dared to tell you this gospel in spite of strong opposition." This verse teaches us two things about boldness:

 (1) Their boldness led Paul and Silas to action (telling the gospel) in the midst of opposition. Biblical boldness will always lead to the courageous action of telling the gospel no matter what the circumstances might dictate.

 (2) This action, however, is not grounded in the emotional makeup or raw courage of the evangelist. Neither is it the boldness of pride or self-assuredness. Rather, it is "with the help of God" or, as the Revised Standard Version states, "We had courage in our God to declare to you the gospel of God." God is the author of such boldness. Boldness is not so much a great act of courage as it is a confidence placed in God's great ability to strengthen the evangelist and confirm the gospel message in the midst of trying circumstances.

 Paul knew that God was committed to bearing witness to the truth of the gospel by the confirming work of the Spirit (1 Thessalonians 1:5; see also Acts 4:29; 14:3; and Hebrews 2:4). He also knew that the gospel was God's instrument to produce eternal results in the lives of those who believed (1 Thessalonians 2:13; see also Acts 20:32).

 Paul had a profound appreciation of his role and God's role in the work of evangelism. He was to step out in the confidence that God would indeed act on behalf of the messenger and the message, taking the initiative to share the gospel even in the midst of difficult circumstances. God would grant him the courage to do so, and would bring lasting results from Paul's obedience in the form of lives changed by the gospel message.

 Boldness and "Aggressive Evangelism"

 Aggressive evangelism is grounded in the biblical concept of boldness. I believe that the word aggressive aptly characterizes Paul's courageous, confident, clear and open evangelistic ministry. To be aggressive means to be disposed to vigorous activity. The one who is aggressive is the determined initiator, the one on the offensive, the risk taker. The aggressive evangelist is the one who, like Paul, is unhindered by the concerns of personal risk and opposition and, in the proper context of sensitivity and propriety, makes sure the gospel is clearly communicated to all who will listen.

 To paraphrase Bill Bright, aggressive evangelism is taking the initiative to share Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit and leaving the results to God. We take the initiative to share Christ with others: we do not wait for them to come and ask us about Christ.

 Let us evaluate aggressive evangelism in light of the three criteria for a biblical philosophy of evangelism. Is it grounded in theology? Is it demonstrated in practice? Does it work?

 Aggressive Evangelism and Biblical Theology

 A biblically informed theology of evangelism compels us to practice aggressive evangelism. There are at least four reasons for this:

 (1) Aggressive evangelism is grounded in the principle of the cruciality of the gospel and the urgency of evangelism. The gospel is good news, not nice views. There is a heaven, there is a hell, there is only one Savior, and there is an eternal choice confronting every man and woman on earth. Those who practice aggressive evangelism take this truth seriously, knowing that the gospel is a crucial, urgent and, therefore, relevant message to all people at all times.

 (2) Aggressive evangelism is grounded in the very nature of the gospel. As Paul so clearly understood, the gospel has a self-authenticating quality. Upon its proclamation, hearing and acceptance, it "performs its work" in those who believe (1 Thessalonians 2:13). It comes not "in word only" as a mere "word of men" (1 Thessalonians 1:5; 2:13), but "in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction" (1 Thessalonians 1:5).

 The gospel is God's instrument, designed to effect the response of repentance and faith in the heart of the nonbeliever. When it is faithfully and simply communicated in the power of the Spirit, the "word of the cross" is the power of God for salvation (1 Corinthians 1:18; Romans 1:16).

 It is crucial to note that the Word of the gospel, as it is presented to sinners, never stands alone; the Spirit of God bears witness to it. The Word is "the sword of the Spirit" (Ephesians 6:17) and as such is said to penetrate the human heart as a living, active, piercing power to effect God's intended result (Hebrews 4:10). Paul knew that the success of his evangelistic ministry was due to the power of the Spirit bearing witness to the truth of the gospel and to its ability to save the lost (Romans 15:19; 1 Corinthians 2:4; 2 Corinthians 6:6; Acts 14:3).

 The gospel, as God's Word, is power. It is more than a cognitive message or symbol of ultimate reality. The gospel is more than just instruction. God's spoken Word is invested with the power to bring order out of chaos, light out of darkness (Genesis 1:1,3) and life out of death in the physical realm (John 11:43,44). Similarly, the gospel, as contained in God's written Word, is able to bring spiritual life out of spiritual death (John 5:24-29) and light out of darkness in the realm of the human heart (2 Corinthians 4:6).

 Aggressive evangelism takes these theological truths to heart as it majors on taking the initiative to bring lost sinners into contact with the gospel. The evangelist is confident that he delivers the gospel, not as a mere competitor in the marketplace of ideas, but as an ambassador entrusted with the most powerful message ever unleashed on mankind. The evangelist is confident that the gospel is capable of creating its own hearing and platform of relevance in a sinner's life. As such, the primary role of the evangelist is simply to turn the message loose.

 (3) Aggressive evangelism is grounded in the saving activity of the Holy Spirit. The ability of the gospel to save sinners is dependent on the fact that God is the ceaseless seeker who sends the Spirit to seek out the lost. As we have just seen, one aspect of this work is that the preaching of the Word of the gospel is always accompanied by the confirming work of the Spirit.

 But a second dimension of the Spirit's saving activity is often unnoticed: His work of "unblinding" and convicting the lost to prepare them to accept the gospel when it is communicated. John 16:8-11 tells us that the Spirit is at work enlightening and freeing men and women who are spiritually blind and bound in Satan's domain. Whenever the seed of the gospel falls on fertile ground, it is evidence that the Spirit has gone ahead of the evangelist to cultivate and water the soil (John 4:34-38; Acts 16:14).

 Aggressive evangelism is tuned into the theological reality that, wherever we go, the Spirit has prepared "many people" (Acts 18:10) to embrace the gospel. Thus, the question must always be asked, "How do we know who is in the process of being unblinded, unbound and convicted by the Holy Spirit? How can we recognize God's many people?" The answer is quite simple. We gain insight into a nonbeliever's spiritual state only as we take the initiative to inquire by means of a sensitive presentation of the gospel.

 Think for a moment how difficult it is for us who have been given our spiritual sight to take the initiative to talk to the lost about the gospel. I have everything going for me, and it is still a monumental struggle. Now think of how difficult it is for those still in an unregenerate state to initiate a conversation with us. Aggressive evangelism takes this very practical concern to heart and reasons, "How can I expect him to take the first step toward me, given his spiritual condition? I must, out of theological necessity, take the first step toward him." We, the spiritually sighted, must, by reason of our sight, move first. We cannot expect the spiritually blind to make the difficult trip to our front door.

 (4) Last, aggressive evangelism is grounded in the authority of Jesus Christ. The Great Commission is an authorized work. By that I mean that Jesus both commands that it be done and ensures the success of our venture. Very simply, the aggressive evangelist, like Paul (2 Corinthians 5:11), holds the conviction that to be obedient is to "go," as Jesus commanded, and to expect that the power, authority and presence of Jesus Himself will ensure the success of his mission. We go, therefore, out of obedience and in an attitude of expectancy.

 The aggressive evangelist realizes that at its most foundational level, evangelism is obedience. As such, circumstances or emotional predisposition do not determine one's philosophy of evangelism. As Charles Spurgeon once stated, "He does not sit in the arm chair and catch fish. If we never do any work for Christ except work we feel up to the mark, we shall not do much." Christianity is a missionary religion. It asks not why men are not coming to us, but why we are not going to men.

 Thus, aggressive evangelism is grounded in biblical theology. An appreciation for the crucial nature of the gospel, the urgency of evangelism, the lostness of man, the power of the gospel to save, the saving work of the Spirit and the authoritative command of Christ to take the gospel to the world all lead the evangelist to one inescapable conclusion: The faithful execution of my role as an ambassador for Christ requires that I take the initiative to ensure that the good news is communicated to all who will listen, as soon as possible, so that they might comprehend the gospel as clearly as possible.

 Aggressive Evangelism and Biblical Practice

 The biblical evidence of the evangelistic practice of the first-century church indicates that aggressive evangelism was the typical approach. It was demonstrated as a way of life. The reason is quite simple: the first-century Christians were gripped by the same theological realities we have discussed. Thus, Jesus initiated a conversation with the woman at the well, Philip with the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26ff), Paul with Lydia (Acts 16:13), and Peter with the Jerusalem Jews (Acts 2:14). Having a personal philosophy and practice of aggressive evangelism puts us in good company.

 It Works!

 I am committed to the practice of aggressive evangelism primarily because it is theologically demanded and biblically demonstrated. But the final reason is that I have seen its practical benefits, both in my own life and in the lives of those with whom I have shared the gospel.

 The Initiative Factor

 A commitment to aggressive evangelism has benefited me greatly in the area of developing my personal motivation to share my faith. By nature, I am not an outgoing person. If left to myself, I would prefer to keep to a small circle of close friends. In terms of a ministry I would prefer to be a keeper of the aquarium rather than a fisher of men.

 But I have found that taking the initiative to share my faith is like exercising a spiritual muscle. The more I put myself in a position to see God work through the sharing of the gospel, the more confidence I gain in the power of the gospel to save and in the ability of Jesus Christ to support me with His supply of courage and strength.

 The adage is true that we more easily act our way into thinking than think our way into acting. It has been freeing to me to realize that God desires to use me as I step out in obedience, and that I need not wait for my emotional makeup or circumstances to dictate when evangelism ought to be done. The issue is never whether or not to go. The command to go has already been given. The only issue is whether I will obey.

 The Wisdom of the Initiative Approach

 The initiative factor also brings practical benefit to the lost. In the 12 years I have been a believer, only a handful of unbelievers have taken the initiative with me to discuss spiritual things. Usually this happened because they had seen me aggressively sharing the gospel with others and knew that I would be a "safe" person to ask some spiritual questions. But I have seen hundreds of others, who never would have taken the initiative with me, respond positively to my attempt to share the gospel with them. Some of these came into God's kingdom as a result. These experiences have taught me some practical lessons that underscore the "why" of aggressive evangelism.

 One afternoon as I was visiting a college student, we were discussing the gospel and his relationship with Christ. He was very interested, and a few days later he trusted in Christ as his Savior as a result of our time together. A week later I had a similar conversation with one of his close friends. It turned out that he had been a Christian for quite some time. As I told him about his friend's newfound faith in Christ, he could hardly believe it. "Him?" he asked. "I'll believe it when I see it".

 I asked him if he had tried to communicate the gospel to him lately. He replied, "There's no way he is interested in the gospel."

 "How do you know he isn't interested?" I asked.

 "Well, he drinks, smokes and doesn't go to church", he replied. (In other words, he acted like a non-Christian.)

 The new believer's Christian friend had taken upon himself the burden of deciding whether or not his friend was ready to "do business" with Christ. His criteria were based purely on external and superficial concerns. He really had no way of wisely discerning his friend's level of spiritual preparedness. Only by taking the initiative to communicate the gospel with him could he have known his interest.

 A philosophy of aggressive-initiative evangelism is simply a wise way of interacting with a spiritually blind world. The Christian committed to taking the initiative relieves himself of the burden of determining another's spiritual receptivity.

 This wisdom of the initiative approach was brought home to me through my experience with a young man with whom I initiated a spiritual conversation a few years ago. As we were discussing the personal implications of the gospel, our time drew to a close, and he invited me to return the next day and continue our conversation. We had taken an hour to establish the relevance of Jesus Christ to his life and the possibility that God really loved him. The next day, after seriously studying passages in the scriptures, he became convinced that he indeed had a personal sin problem. He invited me back a few days later to discuss the gospel further. We talked about Jesus Christ, His death for sin and the necessity of making a personal decision to trust Christ. The spiritual light finally dawned on him, and he placed his faith in Christ.

 If I had asked this young man, "Why didn't you seek out Christians to talk about this? Why did you wait for me to come to you?" he probably would have answered, "I didn't even know I had a spiritual problem before you talked to me. I never knew the solution was to be found in Christ, so why should I seek out Christians?"

 This young man was living proof of the theological reality of man's spiritual blindness. Sin, due to its blinding nature, dulls a nonbeliever to his spiritual problem and its solution in the gospel. Only as the gospel was shared did the Holy Spirit begin the unblinding process so that the gospel could grab hold of this young man. By taking the initiative, we place ourselves in God's hands as His tool to effect spiritual change in the lives of the lost.

 Misconceptions of Aggressive Evangelism

 At this time you might be reasoning, "If this is all so clear, why aren't more Christians committed to aggressive evangelism?" Often a Christian's reluctance to become involved in aggressive evangelism is grounded in misconceptions concerning its nature and implications in practice.

 "Confrontational" Evangelism

 Aggressive evangelism has been unfairly stereotyped in recent years. The most common misconception is that aggressive evangelism is inherently a pushy, confrontational socially awkward and generally insensitive practice.

 We all have seen or heard of people who "turned others off" by their aggressive methods. I once took a new believer to a football game, only to find that another believer was there wearing a sandwich sign proclaiming "Christ is Coming" on the front and "Repent or Go to Hell" on the back. Many in the crowd ridiculed him, and fellow believers were shocked and dismayed at our brother's insensitivity.

 John the Baptist may not have struggled with this method, but my new believer friend had some problems with it. Needless to say, he threw out the baby with the bathwater and refused to have anything to do with taking the initiative to share the gospel. "Why put myself in the same camp with the sandwich-board crowd?" he reasoned. Since this new believer had not developed any personal conviction on the practice of evangelism, he was essentially neutralized as a witnessing Christian.

 I have witnessed the efforts of many street preachers who major in bringing the crowd to an angry confrontation, often resulting in physical blows being inflicted upon the evangelist. I have overheard people in the crowd saying things like, "If this is what real Christianity is all about, leave me out. " Many witnessing Christians cringe, realizing that the nonbelieving world often fails to distinguish between them and others who use some of the more radical methods to proclaim the gospel.

 The last thing I want to do here is criticize the methods of others. I have been on the other end of such criticism, and I know what it feels like. I am thankful for any way that the message is proclaimed and for fruit that comes of it. I admire the boldness of these believers and their willingness to suffer for the gospel. But the fact remains that certain methods of sharing the gospel may erect emotional barriers that inhibit those who are struggling with their own role in evangelism.

 But aggressive evangelism need not be offensive. Taking the initiative to share Christ with someone need not be confrontational or socially awkward. There is no reason in the world that I cannot both take the initiative and be sensitive in communicating the gospel. Disassociating a warm heart and zealous commitment from a sensitive and culturally relevant approach to evangelism usually betrays the acceptance of a false dichotomy. Such thinking says that if I'm aggressive, nothing need stand in my way to get a hearing for the gospel –  not social propriety, or even the sensitivities of the hearer. On the other hand, such reasoning continues, if I am really committed to being a sensitive person, I will respect another's personal space, right to privacy and spiritual sensitivity, and I will refrain from taking the initiative.

 Boldness and Sensitivity

 The first-century church knew no false dichotomy between boldness and sensitivity in their evangelistic practice. In fact, they found it impossible to extricate one from the other. They realized that the message of the gospel traveled along the two-lane highway of boldness and sensitivity. With no boldness, the gospel would be silenced by persecutors, suffering, inconvenient circumstances and the fears of the evangelist. It would never reach the ears of unbelievers.

 Without sensitivity, the gospel might be heard, but not truly understood. The goal of the first-century Christians was not merely to get unbelievers within earshot of the gospel, but to help them truly understand its content and personal implications. Therefore, they boldly took the initiative – in a spirit of sensitivity.

 Paul modeled this combination in Thessalonica. He was bold enough to preach the gospel to potentially hostile strangers, even after he had been physically attacked only days earlier in Philippi.

 But note, in the context of this boldness, Paul took great care to manifest a deep sensitivity. He states that he behaved gently, as "a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children" (1 Thessalonians 2:7). Paul adds, "Having thus a fond affection for you, we were well pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become very dear to us" (1 Thessalonians 2:8). As Paul boldly proclaimed the gospel to them, he was sensitive enough to work "night and day so as not to be a burden to any of you" (1 Thessalonians 2:9). Paul was so sensitive that he did not want the Thessalonians to think for a moment that he was in the gospel preaching business for profit. He was willing to endure "labor and hardship" (1 Thessalonians 2:9) so that they would receive the gospel.

 Paul's sensitivity also manifested itself in great patience in his evangelistic ministry. In the context of bold proclamation, he "reasoned," "explained" and "gave evidence" to his hearers (Acts 17:2,3). Paul was willing to flex and do whatever it took to see men and women come to Christ. While some were probably saved at the first preaching of the gospel, others had to return again and again, discussing the message with Paul and slowly coming to grips with the truth of Jesus' identity as the Messiah. Like a patient farmer, Paul was content to plow the field, plant the seed, and wait for the spiritual harvest of new believers.

 It is obvious then, that there is only a surface contradiction between boldness and sensitivity. Aggressive evangelism by no means implies a lack of sensitivity on the part of the evangelist, or a socially awkward experience for the nonbeliever. Let us pray as Jim Elliot prayed, "Lord, give me firmness without hardness; steadfastness without dogmatism; love without weakness.”3

 “Inflexible" Evangelism

 A second, and closely related misconception is that aggressive evangelism is inherently inflexible due to its insistence on taking the initiative and its embracing of various strategies and tools to communicate effectively with nonbelievers. Thus, it is off limits for those committed to creativity and a natural way-of-life witness. But, grounded in a concern for sensitivity, aggressive evangelism takes on a flexibility that its critics usually ignore.

 Tony, Marcus, and Taking the Initiative

 I like watching football running backs like Tony Dorsett and Marcus Allen. They like to line up deep in the I-formation. For you less informed fans, that means that they are a good seven to eight yards behind the line of scrimmage where their blockers are to arrange for holes to appear in their opponents' defensive line. What does it mean for a runner to be aggressive as he is handed the ball? Does it mean that he should simply put his head down, churn his legs and drive forward until he is tackled? Obviously not. To be aggressive in this situation certainly means to move ahead. But it also means to pick the spot in the line that looks like the best place to break through the defense. It could even mean to give ground while running around the end. It could also mean to run straight ahead if that is where the hole is. It could mean to adjust speed, even to slow down momentarily in the hope that a blocker can make a hole in the defensive line. The runner is aggressive, fighting for every yard he can get, but at the same time he is constantly looking for blockers and open field. His goal is not just to run hard, but to gain yardage, and he will do whatever it takes to accomplish this within the rules of the game.

 We might say that the good runners manifest a "flexible, controlled aggressiveness." This combination is necessary to gain yardage. He must not only be able to drive ahead but also, at any given moment, be able to adjust his course and speed to take advantage of opportunities as they open.

 This example illustrates aggressive evangelism. "Aggressive" does not mean that we become bulls in a china shop, our heads down, trying to make a point by our boldness. Rather, we take the initiative because we are constrained by the theological realities, biblical models and our concern to communicate effectively to the lost.

 Thus, aggressive evangelism will differ from situation to situation, person to person, social context to social context. But at its core is the principle, "I must do anything within the bounds of biblical ethics to initiate effectively and communicate the gospel to all who will listen. " This is the common denominator of all aggressive evangelism, and applies not only to our witness to strangers, but also to our witness to friends and family.

 “Offensive" Evangelism

 A third misconception is that aggressive evangelism is inherently intrusive or offensive to non-Christians. Did the first-century Christians, even in the context of great sensitivity, evoke the offense of nonbelievers? Of course they did. Paul's contemporaries called him a “real pest." People sneered at him (Acts 17:32). He made people angry and resentful (Acts 17:5). But here we need to make a crisp distinction between the manner of the evangelist (boldly taking the initiative) and the actual message of the gospel.

 Paul did not offend people because he took the initiative. Rather, when others were offended, it was by the gospel message itself. We do not find his audiences saying, “Away with this man who has the gall and insensitivity to speak to us before we came to him. How dare he initiate spiritual conversation with us." No, we find the offended responding as they do because the message itself was so upsetting. Just as there is sure to be thunder and lightening as a warm air front meets cold, so there is bound to be emotional and spiritual "thunder and lightening" as the gospel of the kingdom of God confronts those who are in the kingdom of darkness.

 The gospel pierces the heart. It yanks the rug out from under the spiritual pride and complacency of its hearers. Jesus is very clear that we should expect a built-in "offense factor" as we present the gospel to the lost. Those who are aligned with the world's system – whose identities and presuppositions are bound up in the pursuit of the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life – will, unless the Holy Spirit convicts them, have a difficult time with the message and, as a result, reject both the message and the messenger (Luke 12:49-53).

 In John 15:15-25, Jesus tells us that this offense taken against the gospel is grounded in the world's aversion to dealing with Him. This reaches such emotional proportions that Jesus calls it "hate" (John 15:18,19,23). We must take sober note of Jesus' warning that the world's hatred for Him will inevitably manifest itself as a hatred for those who bring His message.

 Therefore, conflict with the nonbelieving world will always be a possibility due to the reality of the spiritual battle that rages over the souls of men. While it is true that some offense may at times be due to the insensitivity of the evangelist or his method (and we should do all we can to avoid this), it would be wrong to assume that all of the sparks are caused by aggressive methods used in evangelism.

 Aggressive evangelism, once freed from these three misconceptions, can be appreciated as a biblical and effective approach to getting out the good news. There is no basis for assuming that the negative traits of insensitivity, inflexibility and offensiveness are inherent to its nature and practice. An informed aggressive evangelist is concerned with one thing: communicating the gospel boldly in such a way that it is understood clearly by the hearer in order that Jesus Christ might be glorified in the lives of both speaker and hearer.