Wednesday, June 30, 2004
Redefining "Evangelism"
In the whole Avodat Yisrael controversy, I noticed something quite peculiar. Those opposed to the gospel use the word "proselytize." As soon as someone uses the word, I know something is wrong. That was my first, but not last clue, that something was amiss with Andrew Sparks and Avodat Yisrael. In my interview with Philadelphia's executive presbyter, the executive presbyter mentioned that there is questions about what "evangelism" means versus what "proselytization" means.
Opponents of the gospel, if time goes on long enough, will try to play word games. Oh, they say they believe in "Jesus." But they mean a person who isn't God in the flesh who was never physically, bodily raised from the grave.
Now it is "evangelism" which will get the treatment. "Evangelism" is a popular word. Who in the church isn't for evangelism? I, as an open-minded opponent of the gospel, am not against evangelism. But when I say "evangelism" I mean just stating what I believe with no effort to try to convince someone that my position is true, nor with any attempt to call the person to repent and follow Jesus.
We can see that in the article about the General Assembly.
Rabbi Gilbert S. Rosenthal, who is executive director of the National Council of Synagogues, isn't against us evangelizing. He went on to say: "I understand evangelism. It means to proclaim the good news of Jesus to all people. That’s perfectly proper ... To evangelize means to tell what you believe and why." So far I'm good with that. But then Rosenthal takes a turn for the worse: But "to proselytize mean you’re trying to capture their souls." And Rosenthal warns that history has shown that the one who tries to take your soul "is apt to take your body in the process."
Do you see the difference? No call to repentance is ok. Not trying to get me over to your side is ok. Actually trying to convince me is bad.
Now, I think that is what Rosenthal believes. He may think that Messianic Jews employ deception and coercion. Because no properly taught Jew would convert without conversion. Right? Not quite Rabbi. Leave the stereotypes at the door and free your mind.
So let's be careful with the verbiage. When confronting Andrew Sparks, don't ask him whether or not he supports evangelism. He may say yes when he means "tell people our church is having tea and crumpets on Tuesday." Ask him, "can anyone get to heaven without faith in Jesus?" Ask him, "do you call people, Jews and Gentiles, to repent of their sins and have faith and follow Jesus?" "If not, why not?"
Sparks already answered the first question to me: "I don't know. Let God be God." (That's a paraphrase.) He, in the press, has answered negative to the second question. That leaves the third question.
Rabbi, while you may not like the fact they cling to Jewish identity and believe in Jesus, you don't have to fear them preaching the gospel.
In the whole Avodat Yisrael controversy, I noticed something quite peculiar. Those opposed to the gospel use the word "proselytize." As soon as someone uses the word, I know something is wrong. That was my first, but not last clue, that something was amiss with Andrew Sparks and Avodat Yisrael. In my interview with Philadelphia's executive presbyter, the executive presbyter mentioned that there is questions about what "evangelism" means versus what "proselytization" means.
Opponents of the gospel, if time goes on long enough, will try to play word games. Oh, they say they believe in "Jesus." But they mean a person who isn't God in the flesh who was never physically, bodily raised from the grave.
Now it is "evangelism" which will get the treatment. "Evangelism" is a popular word. Who in the church isn't for evangelism? I, as an open-minded opponent of the gospel, am not against evangelism. But when I say "evangelism" I mean just stating what I believe with no effort to try to convince someone that my position is true, nor with any attempt to call the person to repent and follow Jesus.
We can see that in the article about the General Assembly.
Rabbi Gilbert S. Rosenthal, who is executive director of the National Council of Synagogues, isn't against us evangelizing. He went on to say: "I understand evangelism. It means to proclaim the good news of Jesus to all people. That’s perfectly proper ... To evangelize means to tell what you believe and why." So far I'm good with that. But then Rosenthal takes a turn for the worse: But "to proselytize mean you’re trying to capture their souls." And Rosenthal warns that history has shown that the one who tries to take your soul "is apt to take your body in the process."
Do you see the difference? No call to repentance is ok. Not trying to get me over to your side is ok. Actually trying to convince me is bad.
Now, I think that is what Rosenthal believes. He may think that Messianic Jews employ deception and coercion. Because no properly taught Jew would convert without conversion. Right? Not quite Rabbi. Leave the stereotypes at the door and free your mind.
So let's be careful with the verbiage. When confronting Andrew Sparks, don't ask him whether or not he supports evangelism. He may say yes when he means "tell people our church is having tea and crumpets on Tuesday." Ask him, "can anyone get to heaven without faith in Jesus?" Ask him, "do you call people, Jews and Gentiles, to repent of their sins and have faith and follow Jesus?" "If not, why not?"
Sparks already answered the first question to me: "I don't know. Let God be God." (That's a paraphrase.) He, in the press, has answered negative to the second question. That leaves the third question.
Rabbi, while you may not like the fact they cling to Jewish identity and believe in Jesus, you don't have to fear them preaching the gospel.
