If God is sovereign and predestined who will be saved, why bother to evangelise? JI Packer tackled this crucial issue in the book "Evangelism & the Sovereignty of God"...
But one passage abt 'method' of evangelism stuck in my mind more than any others... Basically I'm a relativist when it comes to methods, the message must be right la
But Packer says, "In the last analysis there is only one method of evangelism, namely the faithful explanation and application of the gospel message...
We have to ask: is the way we present the gospel calculated to convey to people the application of the gospel and not just part of it, but the whole of it — the summons to see and know oneself as God sees and knows one, that is as a sinful creature and to face the breadth and depth of the need into which a wrong relationship with God has brought one, and to face too the cost and consequences of turning to receive Christ as Savior and Lord?
Or is it likely to be deficient here and to gloss over some of this, and to give an inadequate distorted impression of what the gospel requires?...Will it leave people supposing that all they have to do is to trust Christ as sin–bearer not realizing that they must also deny themselves and enthrone Him as their Lord (the error which we might call only–believisim)?"
I think that's quite similar to the point McLaren made when he says, in paraphrase, "When we change our methods, our message changes as well". An unsympathetic hearer may panic and wonder if McLaren is calling us to change the gospel??
I think what he's saying is, when we change our methods, the way the message comes across to people changes as well... There may be many different, valid methods but not all methods are created equal... We still need to ask if the method facilitates a "faithful explanation and application of the gospel message"?
Check out Reisinger's "God's role and Man's role in Salvation"
Comments