Witnessing, serving God,and uncivil hateful people..

[derrick09]

Hey guys, I'm really having problems on how to serve God especially with the economy and even more so, with the way most unbelievers as well as people in general are currently. It's been this way ever since I've been alive and has gotten worse in the last few years, people not only don't want to listen and have civil conversations with others whose views they disagree with, but now they hate, despise and want to kill each other on the spot. I especially have noticed this in discussions about politics and about God. The thing I'm noticing now is people want to lump all atheists in with democrats and all Christians in with republicans.

But that's not what I'm worried about. I'm worried that because of this uncivil and hateful atmosphere we have in society now especially in America, it will be next to impossible for God to use other people (be it pastors, apologists and any other Christian) to bring unbelievers to Christ. The only way that I truly think that God can bring today's westernized, scientific, intellectual, and overly hateful unbeliever to Christ is to literally show up Himself and perform a supernatural miracle (and not just a circumstantial miracle but a real red sea dead raising type miracle) right in front of them.

I know for a fact I can't be used. Most people (and all unbelievers) treat me like garbage when I'm out in public or on the Internet and they won't even let me talk to them about the weather let alone about God. I'm not a dynamic speaker, I'm not outgoing, I"m very shy, and even though I know quite a bit in apologetics, today's unbelievers lash out to me and to most other believers with such hatered it's almost like they truly have a demon within them like the kind you see in the Exorcist film.

Most people are indeed becoming that evil today from what I've been seeing for the past few years. Things are so bad, I can't even be a help or a blessing to other Christians in my area. Because of the fact that they all hate to be intellectuals, they hate science, they hate technology, they hate computers, they hate being reasonable and they certainly hate being civil and non violent. And above all things, they hate apologetics.

The Christians in my area just like to wave their hands, handle snakes, talk in unknown gibberish, and they especially love being hypocritical and legalistic. When I try to tell them about what I know all they are interested in doing is telling me that I'm wrong and for me to reject my intellect and embrace emotion and dogma. So the only people I feel like I can benefit currently is myself and maybe just maybe a few of you all here. But I somewhat doubt the latter. But this fact really leaves me feeling unfulfilled, disappointed and depressed. It seems like the only way I could even have a chance at bringing the gospel to people is to pray and to donate money to missionary organizations and or apologetics organizations.

Because in this day and age the simple "Billy Graham" style gospel no longer works in America especially with people in my age group and younger. Almost always it has to be mixed with apologetics to have even the slightest effect. And people today with their uncivil animal like hatred even makes that pretty much impossible to accomplish. The only other places on earth where the simple Billy Graham style gospel works is in primitive, tribal, non westernized (and non muslim * a whole other animal pun intended*) areas. Those are about the only areas that normal people without God literally performing big time miracles (again not just circumstantial so called modern miracles, but true supernatural Red Sea parting dead raising type miracles ones that big groups of people can see with their own eyes)

Now I do want to strongly point out that God does a miracle though unseen miracle in people's lives when He saves them. Many can say they can see the miracle in the way how that a newly saved person acts. But what I'm trying to show is a person has to be willing and ready to receive the gospel and be able to listen. And today with most people in America and elsewhere who have easy access to a Richard Dawkins book are just not able to do that. All they want to do is argue hatefully, interrupt, and even get violent and try to kill the messenger. And I almost get that same exact reaction from other Christians in my area when I try to present them apologetics.

But what bothers me most of all is I feel like God expects me to set the world on fire for Him. And the problem is, I'm not God's superstar. I can't break down all these barriers. And by allowing people to get so stupidly hateful and so hatefully stupid if God doesn't change the atmosphere then this could be the end of the great commission (at least in developed western nations) and the beginning of the great tribulation.

But anyway as I've said in many other threads, I hope I'm wrong. And I ask you all to please show me that I am indeed wrong. Because I want to be in this case. And unlike many other people today, I'm willing to listen.

[Canuckster1127]

Derrick, I'll try to give a more detailed answer for you on this, but on a short note, what makes you think that we're in any way responsible for how people respond to our efforts in this area? Further, I'm not convinced that the evangelical view of evangelism that your statements reflect are completely accurate either. It may be that you'll lose a great deal of your frustration if you realize that you're not under the obligation it appears you're shouldering here. Just a thought. I'll try to give a better answer later (I'm on my way out to run some errands right now.)

[Katabole]

Hi Derrick,

I agree with a lot of what you said. Presently I believe that there is a great movement away from the Christian faith and to fill the void, Christianity is being usurped with replacement ideology. And according to scripture, it will increase in its ignorance and severity.

2Tim 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

2Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

2Tim 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Many don't like Christianity Derrick because they do not like authority. They refuse to accept that the things they do in life, as much as they themselves consider whay they do as righteous, God never would. So when they learn that God makes a distinction between good and evil and the holy and profane, instead of repenting and turning to God, they remove God from the equation of their life. And they despise anyone who objects to their belief and all those who follow Christianity. Remember what they did to Stephen in Acts.

According to 1Corinthians 12, we are all given different gifts. My gift is not the same as yours. If you are part of God's will, then you will fulfill the part that is assigned to you. Don't underestimate yourself by saying you can't be used. Saying hello to a stranger on the street can make a difference in life. Members of my own family don't believe in Christ. Many people I work with don't believe in God. I refuse to let their ignorance depress me because it is just too easy to follow the ways of the world. Jesus wants us to be like salt. Salt brings out the flavour of food. Salt can cleanse wounds as well but it certainly stings in the process of cleansing.


John 7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hates, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

If people don't like you Derrick, it's because of who you believe in; not who you are. 2000 years ago many hated Jesus. They still hate Him today. Jesus did not let their hatred of Him change Him. And He expected those who believe in and follow Him to do the same.

[Canuckster1127]

As promised here's some thoughts to your original post Derrick.

First, give some consideration to what I'm going to say, in the context of Church History. Evangelicalism arose relatively recently, and primarily through not Billy Graham, although he's the best known modern example of an evangelical giant, but through Charles Finney and D.L. Moody. Even before them, you have George Whitefield operating on a similar paradigm.

Pretty much the philosophy that underlies it are the following:

1. If you are lost, you must be saved and
2. If you are saved, you must win the lost.

Within Evanglicalism as a movement, these precepts pretty much are elevated to the equal of (even greater than) the two things Jesus said upon which Hang all the Law and the prophets, namely Loving God wholly and your neighbor as yourself.

If you look through the New Testament however, these Evangelical precepts are not a major theme. I can't think of any verse in any letter in the New Testament where any of the authors there, Paul, Peter, John, James or Jude where the Church as a whole is exhorted to preach the gospel to the lost.

That doesn't mean I'm against it. I just think it's important to recognize that this emphasis as pre-eminent over all over Scriptural themes, as it is within evangelicalism, isn't a Scriptural theme.

Evangelism in the early Church was a specialized function that was the responsibility primarily of the Apostles and those specifically called to be evangelists. It wasn't assumed that everyone in the church body was going to be an evangelist, anymore than it was assumed that everyone in the church was going to be those roles that are noted in Eph 4:11. Evangelicals today appear to believe that contrary to what Paul says here, that only some are Apostles, some are prophets, and some are pastors and teachers, but Evangelicals assert that all are to be Evangelists.

Add to this that the Great Commission of the Gospel of Matthew from Christ was not a command to the entire Church but to the 12 apostles.

If we assume, as Evangelicals do, that the need is so urgent and so great as to merity immediate efforts at any cost to reach every lost person with a formal gospel presentation then we have a serious problem when looking at those apostles who received the Great Commission because the remained in Jerusalem for at least 4 years before they began spreading the Gospel in the areas outside of Jerusalem, let alone the pagans or Greeks and Romans, which didn't seriously start for decades following.

The bottom line is that sharing Jesus Christ with others is not a duty, a religious obligation or anything that you or anyone else should feel guilty about if we fail to do it in the prescribed manner (whatever the hip method is now and in the past was the 4 spiritual laws, chick tracts, evangelism explosion etc.) that is presented as being every believers responsibility. All of this, is a post-apostolic idea and an ex-scriptural idea. Sharing Christ is a spontaneous thing that comes about because of our personal walk with Christ and our love for others. The Holy Spirit prepares the soil and we remain open and sensitive for the opportunities when they come about in the natural course of things, not because we're guilted by somebody and the latest flavor-of-the-month program, whatever it might be.

In the first century the greatest evangelism "method" was a loving and effective community of believers that loved Christ and then one another in a way that went against the grain of how the world usually functions. The way a body of believers expresses itself is very important. It's often this corporate witness that others from the outside look in to see that is much more powerful and important tham individual scripts which we give by rote repetition to people we don't even know and whom we have no idea whether the Spirit is drawing them toward God or not.

Too there can be seasons in a church's life where outreach and attraction of new believers is just a natural part of what God is doing in their midst. Not all seasons in a church's life and ministry highlights evangelism as effective. When things are done out of season and forced, the work isn't effective and people burn out and get discouraged when the fact is, the Lord isn't in the midst of them leading that way primarily right now.

If you don't believe me, go back to the front of this and find for me in the Epistles any command to the church at large to evangelize. I don't believer you'll find it, but I'm happy to respond to any passages anyone wants to offer that says otherwise. What happens is, evangelicals read the Scriptures through the lens of their assumptions and then find ways to make those Scriptures say what they want them to say.

I'm not saying not to present the gospel to the lost. I'm saying the emphasis and methods of much of what passes for evangelism with the evangelical movement has really only been around for just over 100 years and that it's not primarily scripturally driven and it relies on methods and guilt to motivate people and is not driven by the Spirit of God in the manner that evangelicals assume to be a de facto assumption.

That'll probably make some people pretty uncomfortable and challenge them at a very deep level. Again, there's not a Scriptural case to be made or a purely Scriptural foundation for much of what modern evangelicalism assumes in this realm.

[jlay]

If you look through the New Testament however, these Evangelical precepts are not a major theme. I can't think of any verse in any letter in the New Testament where any of the authors there, Paul, Peter, John, James or Jude where the Church as a whole is exhorted to preach the gospel to the lost.

Interesting way to frame the question. Certainly, they were commissioned by Christ Himself to do that very thing. Go into all the world preaching the gospel. Starting in Jerusalem.

The bottom line is that sharing Jesus Christ with others is not a duty, a religious obligation or anything that you or anyone else should feel guilty about if we fail to do it in the prescribed manner (whatever the hip method is now and in the past was the 4 spiritual laws, chick tracts, evangelism explosion etc.) that is presented as being every believers responsibility. All of this, is a post-apostolic idea and an ex-scriptural idea. Sharing Christ is a spontaneous thing that comes about because of our personal walk with Christ and our love for others. The Holy Spirit prepares the soil and we remain open and sensitive for the opportunities when they come about in the natural course of things, not because we're guilted by somebody and the latest flavor-of-the-month program, whatever it might be.

I don't perse disagree, that sharing Christ isn't being obligated to any particular method or strategy. I would disagree about it being spontaneous. I am not saying it can't be spontaneous. But I see that as the equivalent of saying that not sinning is spontaneous. The believer can greive the spirit. The believer can neglect their calling. The believer can stumble into sin. Should the believer have contrition (guilt) over such things? We can debate guilt, but we know the bible speaks of Godly sorrow that leads to repentance, versus worldly sorrow. If a believer feels guilty for not sharing their faith, then they need to examine why.
The other big issue is fear. We have an enemy and his desire is to quiet the believer and prevent the gospel from being heard. (Eph 6:11) Paul himself exorts, that how can one hear unless someone preaches it to them. (Rom 10:14)
And Paul himself request prayer that he may FEARLESSLY make known the mystery of the gospel. (Eph 6:19-20) Does that sound like its just a spontaneous thing, or does Paul know that fear is a real enemy that one has to overcome, to make the gospel known?
Col 4:2-6
1 Pet 3:15

No argument, that there are many distortions regarding evangelism, not to mention all the other areas. I don't know that I would call evangelism a duty, but it is a specific gift for some. Ask a group of Christians which ones think that evangelism is their spiritaul gift and see what response you get. Ask any group of believers if they have fear about sharing their faith one on one or with a group, and see what response you get. Gifts are to be utilized by the believer. So is it wrong to exhort, equip instruct a believer to share their faith?

It should be noted, that the first thing that happened at Pentecost resulted in an open air preaching to thousands. Granted Peter was the one who spoke. Not all are gifted in evangelism. But that doesn't mean that all believers are not witnesses. A true believer is a witness to the resurrection and its effects in their own life.

If we assume, as Evangelicals do, that the need is so urgent and so great as to merity immediate efforts at any cost to reach every lost person with a formal gospel presentation then we have a serious problem when looking at those apostles who received the Great Commission because the remained in Jerusalem for at least 4 years before they began spreading the Gospel in the areas outside of Jerusalem, let alone the pagans or Greeks and Romans, which didn't seriously start for decades following.

That was because their specific command was to first evangelize, and make disciples in Jerusalem. Jerusalem did not receive its commission, and therefore Paul was called into his role.
Odd. Most people don't look back at the early church for excuses not to evangelize. But with reverence of the reality that most of the known world had been impacted by Christ within just 50 years of his crucifixtion. This without modern conveniences of media and transit. Not to mention the tremendous persecution.

First, give some consideration to what I'm going to say, in the context of Church History. Evangelicalism arose relatively recently, and primarily through not Billy Graham, although he's the best known modern example of an evangelical giant, but through Charles Finney and D.L. Moody. Even before them, you have George Whitefield operating on a similar paradigm.

Wesley, Whitfield and Spurgeon.
At the heart of evangelism is the reformation. The reformation was born out of a desire to see the word of God in the common language. This gave rise to the protestant movement, which ripped off the shackels of the RCC that bound up the church and the word. The newness of the evangelical move (300 years) is not a reason against it. Examining church history explains its rise.

I will agree that love is the central theme of evangelism. But biblical love is most evidenced in obedience. "If you love me, keep my commands" says Jesus. So, the love of our neighbor is not best demonstrated in warm fuzzies, but in our obedience to serve them and win them to Christ. There is nothing more selfless.

Let this mind that is in Christ be in you.
What was in Christ's mind? "The son of man has come to seek and save that which is lost."

In the first century the greatest evangelism "method" was a loving and effective community of believers that loved Christ and then one another in a way that went against the grain of how the world usually functions. The way a body of believers expresses itself is very important. It's often this corporate witness that others from the outside look in to see that is much more powerful and important tham individual scripts which we give by rote repetition to people we don't even know and whom we have no idea whether the Spirit is drawing them toward God or not.

Not denying its importance, but I don't see how you can claim this as the greatest method. Let's not forget that this is also a community in which Annanias and Sapphira dropped dead, for holding back some money. I'm sure that would attract people by the droves.
And Jesus said, when HE is lifted up He will draw ALL men unto Himself.

[Canuckster1127]

Hi Jlay,

Thanks for the response and I appreciate a lot that you have to say.

1. As I think I noted before, the great commission was not delivered to the Church as a whole. It was delivered to the Apostles and specific to their time and place. That doesn't preclude others being involved in its fulfillment, but it's not a commission delivered directly to the entire church.

2. Preaching is a legitmate calling to those gifted as evangelists. The issue is if all, as common evangelical practice usually dictates, are called and directed to operate in that manner. Believing that not all are called in that regard, doesn't negate the legitimacy of those who are.

3. Giving a defense to those who ask you is a far sight different than going out and using methods developed using psychology and sales techniques to people who don't.

4. I didn't see you making a claim that any of the passages you cite were commands to the church at large to evangelize. Maybe I missed it. If something is the heart and soul of Christ, as you assert, does it make sense that you'd need to cobble it by inference?

You note at the end that it is Christ drawing all men unto Himself. That's a far sight different than turning evangelism into an obligation of works by our efforts, don't you think?

As I hope was clear, my challenge was not to deny evangelism, but rather to challenge the common evangelical view and assumptions about it. I'm sure it's uncomfortable to consider some of the things I've said. In many ways, it flies in the face of evangelical's spiritual DNA. I think they are questions worthy of consideration however and I stand by my belief that evangelism is a gift within the church to which some are called, and I'm grateful for those. Further, there's no question that any believer can be used in this manner (although statistics show pretty clearly that most are not.) I'm suggesting that this may affirm God's biblical model of gifting and relying upon that rather than the current method of most evangelicals which is to practically assert that there is not special gifting; all are called to be evangelists (despite clear Biblical evidence to the contrary) and therefore it's an effort of works based upon presumed guilt for the destiny of others and our lack of effort that in the end (as I've heard preached countless times) that condemns people to hell.

I take seriously John 13:35. I think a healthy local church that is functioning with Christ as the head and love demonstrated among one another is a powerful witness. More powerful than about 90% (I"m being kind in assuming even the 10% remaining) of what churches try to program without any discernable reliance upon the work and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

[derrick09]

Very excellent stuff Bart, it does make me feel better knowing that I don't HAVE to go up to total (and extremely hostile) strangers and "cold witness" to them (cold witnessing being defined as you walk up to the meanest most sinful looking stranger you can find and the first words you shout (not say but shout) to him is "repent or perish" or as they say in my area "penterprsh" *a one word phrase ) And when people in my area do this they have to talk out of the side of their mouth like Peter S. Ruckman or something.

But all kidding aside one of the things I was very concerned was if I don't directly help lead tons of people to Christ especially by cold witnessing or Ray Comfort methods I will end up getting next to nothing as far as additional rewards in the afterlife. I guess you remember this thread that I did sometime ago....

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... +in+heaven

Now I do love your viewpoint on heavenly rewards but I'm just nervous about your view being wrong since not only the vast majority of Christians and the evangelical establishment believes in it but even top apologists like Gary Habermas believe and teach it. So I just hope I can be able to obtain a similar reward and or accomplish as much for Christ though other methods such as the ones I listed in my original post, instead of subjecting myself to constant frustration, humiliation, and maybe even a early martyrdom from cold witnessing and Ray Comfort methods.

Not that martyrdom is such a bad thing, I wouldn't mind being martyred myself, just not right now or at least until I live a full life. Because there are some things like having a wife and all that goes with it that I can only have here in this life and not in the afterlife. So anyway that's where I'm at currently and I hope I can make something out of it in the next few years. Talk to you later Bart, take care, God bless.

[jlay]

Bart,

I too appreciate what you are saying here. Many of today's evenagelical methods are flawed IMO. The problem is not declaring that sharing Christ is neglected. I believe it is. Nor is the problem (regarding #3) making people aware that they are in fact not prepared to give a reason. The fact is, many if not most are not prepared. If we are to be prepared then is Peter not saying we have an obligation to prepare ourselves?

For one, I am not a supporter of Billy Graham type crusades. And I do see flaws in many of the programs out there. ABCs of becoming a Christian. The sinner's prayer, etc. In fact the Campus Crusade founder later stated several of the problems with his four pillar method. I'd say we are both in agreement that many of the methodologies are flawed.

You note at the end that it is Christ drawing all men unto Himself. That's a far sight different than turning evangelism into an obligation of works by our efforts, don't you think?

It depends. Shouldn't a believer trust and assume that God wants him to walk in the good works He has prepared beforehand? Aren't our lives intersecting with the lost?
Sadly, a believer step out of the ordained path, and can give a list of reasons to justify why He isn't in that path? "I'm not called to this or that, etc." The need is the call.

based upon presumed guilt for the destiny of others and our lack of effort that in the end (as I've heard preached countless times) that condemns people to hell.

I understand what you are saying here. But, should beleivers be concerned with the eternal wellfare of others. I'm certain you would say yes. Paul Himself says, how will they hear unless someone preaches to them. Rom 10:14. I don't mean to just rip that out of context, but He is speaking of sharing the gospel with a people.


Derrick, oftentimes focusing on the methods is what frustrates us. If our focus is on Christ, and we are growing in Christ, then we are going to be used of Christ. And likely in ways we never thought possible.The natural byproduct of abiding in Him is bearing fruit. Now, I wouldn't say that the fruit has to be witnessing to a stranger. But equally, we have no right to exclude it as a produce of abiding. It's not about quotas or putting a notch on one's belt. So, our focus shouldn't be the fruit, but the abiding in the vine. Wouldn't it be just like God to use you in a way that was contrary to your own leanings. Reminds me of Moses.

When people start talking about rewards in heaven, the natural inclination is to ascribe material and earthly qualities. I think it is flat wrong.

But all kidding aside one of the things I was very concerned was if I don't directly help lead tons of people to Christ especially by cold witnessing or Ray Comfort methods I will end up getting next to nothing as far as additional rewards in the afterlife. I guess you remember this thread that I did sometime ago....

When I hear this, I think of the widows mite. We think of Billy Graham, and the masses of people. But Billy himself said that more people will be won to Christ by individual Christians sharing their faith one on one. I don't think God is got some score board up in heaven where we are ranked based on our evangelical prowess. There is as much value to Phillips encounter with the Ethiopian, as there is to Peter's sermon on Pentecost. There is as much value to Jesus' encounter with Nicodemus, as there was with his sermon on the Mount.

I can say, as one who had great trepidation about sharing my faith, that I have been blessed in my opportunities where I have. I have witnessed to friends and complete strangers. Some of those were just where I saw that I had been given an opportunity to cross paths with someone. Some where more intentional. In fact I have been thanked, even by atheist for caring enough to talk to them about such matters. Not saying that every reaction has been pleasant.

(cold witnessing being defined as you walk up to the meanest most sinful looking stranger you can find and the first words you shout (not say but shout) to him is "repent or perish" or as they say in my area "penterprsh" *a one word phrase ) And when people in my area do this they have to talk out of the side of their mouth like Peter S. Ruckman or something.

Who in the world is teaching this as a method? To go up and shout at people 'repent or perish.' Certainly not Ray Comfort, as I have read their material extensively. If people are doing so in your area, I would like to know more. That's insane.

[zoegirl]

Remember, Derrick, that some are called to prepare the soil, some are called to water and nurture, and some are called to harvest. Not all are called to harvest. According to our gifts and talents.

Not all of the students I have are Christians. That doesn't mean I must go up to them at some point and "cold-witness". It does mean, however, that I am to show the love of Christ and teach through a Christian worldview. This, in essence, is witnessing to them. It means I should be open and listen to the calling to where I can perhaps verbally

What is the famous saying? "Preach the Gospel at all times and, if necessary, use words". Wise words and we woul ddo well to remember them in the grocery store line, the bank, everywhere where we have interactions with people.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

[derrick09]

Great point zeogirl, I hope that really is the case, becuase personally I don't feel like I'm cut out to be someone who can effectively cold witness. I'm not a very social person. At least when it comes to offline. I won't even talk to people about weather nonetheless about God or politics (and the fact that the two mingle together). Not to mention as I said earlier, people are becomming more and more stupid, crazy, violent, confrontational over topics like God, religion and politics. And to be quite honest, I'm not a brawler. I don't have muscles. I don't have a black belt in twi kwon do, I don't take steroids and meth (like so many in my area and home state do), I don't drink beer. I'm somewhat small and thin and I'm more and more turning into a egghead thinks to apologetics, just someone worlds apart from someone who would be cut out to be a cold witnesser.

Those people who do that around todays crazy non believers almost have to have muscles and a black belt because nowadays if you do offer the gospel to anyone you do have be prepared for a brawl.... or for martyrdom. So that's why I'm at the place that I'm at currently. That and just the fact that no one would listen to what I have to say anyway. People don't want to listen to anyone anymore. Unless it's someone who already holds the same EXACT views as the one doing the talking. It's a sad and disgusting reality.

I really wish I could have lived during the 1940s, 50s, 60s or even 70s and 80s (80s as a mature adult that is)back during a time where people left their doors unlocked. Because then some people would listen and act civil or at least more civil than they do today. I'd do anything for a time machine. That and I could also photograph some awesome race cars. sigh.

[RickD]

Remember, Derrick, that some are called to prepare the soil, some are called to water and nurture, and some are called to harvest. Not all are called to harvest. According to our gifts and talents.

Not all of the students I have are Christians. That doesn't mean I must go up to them at some point and "cold-witness". It does mean, however, that I am to show the love of Christ and teach through a Christian worldview. This, in essence, is witnessing to them. It means I should be open and listen to the calling to where I can perhaps verbally

What is the famous saying? "Preach the Gospel at all times and, if necessary, use words". Wise words and we woul ddo well to remember them in the grocery store line, the bank, everywhere where we have interactions with people.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Thank You Zoe, This post is simple, and to the point. What you said here, and what Bart posted earlier, means A LOT to me. Thank you both.

[jlay]

Romans 8:37

Eph 2:10

Phil 4:13

Matt 19:26

Eph 1:3

God doesn't call the qualified. He qualifies the called.

2 Cor 12:9

1 Tim 1:2

Eph 3:16

Col 1:10-11

Psalm 121:1-2

Eph 6:10-17

[Canuckster1127]

Romans 8:37

Eph 2:10

Phil 4:13

Matt 19:26

Eph 1:3

God doesn't call the qualified. He qualifies the called.

2 Cor 12:9

1 Tim 1:2

Eph 3:16

Col 1:10-11

Psalm 122:1-2

Eph 6:2

Jlay, what point are you attempting to make? Before you invoke verses of this nature isn't it a prerequisite that you establish that what you're advocating that God will empower and strengthen people to obey is in fact a universal command to all Christians? Where's that?

[jlay]

Sorry Bart,

I had a post typed and lost it. So, i just quickly put up some verses that might counsel Derrick with his concerns. And put the one comment. Derrick is concerned about a number of things. His demeanor, his physical stature and personality. None of which preclude him from being used of God in a mighty way. I wish I could introduce him to a friend of mine that does prison ministry in this area.

I actually work with a ministry that ministers to thousands of people in his area. We've never been threatened or been in a brawl. If he wants some genuine ministry opportunities where he doesn't have to go up and yell at people, 'repent or perish' I might be able to help.

[derrick09]

Well quite honestly I feel like I don't have the gift to be involved in prison ministry. I've seen prison ministries on television and have heard about them on the radio, Internet and elsewhere. From what I've seen the people who speak to prisoners are part of one or more of three categories.

They either are well known speakers or pastors, they are either prisoners themselves or they used to be in prison (that way they can relate better to their audience) or they have an amazing testimony. Now for me, I don't fit any of those three categories. I'm not a well known speaker, I'm not even a speaker nonetheless a well known speaker, I've never been to prison (and don't plan on it) and I don't have a amazing testimony. Quite honestly it's less than normal.

I got saved at a early age because I didn't want to go to hell and I had a love and attraction towards the God of the Bible. I was able to get saved early also because my grandfather was a deacon and part time pastor of the church I attended at the time.

And after my salvation I later had minor to moderate issues with intellectual and emotional doubt. When it first happened I tried talking to pastors and to teachers who taught at the private Christian schools I attended during my middle and high school years. They of course couldn't help any since at the time I nor they had ever heard about apologetics before. Once I got to college my doubts intensified and then I finally was able to stumble across apologetics.

I first was attracted to popular yec apologetics but after seeing their lack of quality along with how they get their backsides handed to them by atheists I ended up switching to oec and have been working with like minded apologists in handling all my doubts, questions, and issues. And now for the most part that is now resolved but now I'm in the process in seeing what I can do as far as a ministry and that leads me to where I'm at currently.

So that's my testimony, it's dull, boring, tasteless. I never tried drugs, I never murdered anyone and I never was an atheist even during my times of doubt. Also when I became saved I didn't see a bright light, hear angels sing, nor hear God speak to me (not even in a emotional feeling sense). So I'm not cut out to be much of a direct help to anyone. The only thing I feel like I can do is either pray for, donate money to, or work behind the scenes somewhere for some ministry in some what that's not directly in front of people.

Now even though I know quite a bit in apologetics I'm not well good at articulating it to people especially out in public since as I stated in my earlier posts, people in this day and age don't want to listen, all they want to do is tell you that you are wrong. And if that doesn't work then they will treat you like a news reporter in Egypt. So basically that is the lot that I"m dealt. That's basically all I know to do at this time.

So does anyone else have anything that they want to add? Bart, do you have anything else you want to add? Thanks again for your previous comments Bart.