Yesterday I was flying back from LA. My team and I were having dinner in a crowded airport restaurant when a man asked if he could sit with us. To shorten the story, he's on staff with Fellowship of Christian Athletes and I hoped to get him to share the gospel with my team since I am somewhat limited in evangelizing those that I supervise. After some small talk about FCA, I gave him an easy set-up by asking how he became a Christian. He gave some personal background and then said that "I asked Jesus in my heart."
Later during the flight I sat beside someone I didn't know but lives close to me. We talked for a while about all kinds of things. I prayed for the Spirit's help in making a gospel connection with him. Then I asked him what he thought of the Christian faith. This gave him a chance to talk about his Catholic upbringing and how he has gotten away from it. I was able to respond to him with an explanation of a holy and just God who will punish sin, our dire situation as sinners, the substitutionary work of Christ on our behalf, and the need to repent of our sins and put our full trust in the work of Jesus.
Any thoughts on the difference between these two approaches?
2 comments:
Aside from the problems associated with using "Christian lingo," I think the first example can be easily passed off as being "good for him." With all the influences of post-modernism in our culture, it's easy for people to accept, even laud others for doing something religious that works for them, while not even beginning to consider it for themselves.
The second instance forces people to consider the truths of Christianity and the implications of those truths. And of course, if true, those truths impact everyone, not just the person who's claiming it "works" for them.
Exactly. The only response from the FCA staff member's testimony was a "good for you."
Post a Comment