ANALYZING THE COMMAND TO EVANGELIZE

INTRODUCTION:

A common doctrine that has arisen out of an interpretation of Mt 28:19-20 is that all Christians have been called upon by Jesus to fulfill what is called the Great Commission, to carry the message of the gospel (usually verbally or by "inviting them to church") to everyone on earth (or as many as can be reached in one's lifetime). This is stated rather strongly: God has this purpose for each Christian (some say the only purpose). Other passages have been used by different groups to support this view.

The following outline is intended to be read with a Bible in hand (author's preference: New American Standard) and with an open mind. The objective of this paper is to examine the relevant passages from a historical perspective, showing that the aforementioned viewpoint is incorrect. Support for a point is generally not given where the view expressed is that which is commonly believed.

This document will be revised as the author learns more in his study of the holy writings.

Identity of the "Lost"

This expression is commonly used as though synonymous with "unsaved". We will perform an exegetical study of the pertinent Biblical passages in order to come up with a historical viewpoint as to the identity of the "lost".

Ezek 34

1. v.1-6: state of Israel (God's sheep)

2. v.11-16: God to rescue Israel including a group of lost sheep.

3. v.23-25: coming of the Messiah--a son of David. See also Ezek 37:24-28 (about uniting Israel).

Lk 15

1. v.1-2: Jesus' eating with "sinners" provokes ridicule

2. v.3-7: Jesus' reply, part one: parable of lost sheep

3. v.8-10: Reply, part two: parable of lost coin

4. v.11-32: Reply, part three: parable of lost son

5. Parallels of the three parables
   1. "Caretaker" figure representing God.
   2. What becomes lost always starts with God. The lost are those who leave God.
   3. Number of objects lost changes, is unimportant.
   4. Concluding remarks about sinners repenting.

Jn 10:1-18--Jesus as shepherd (fulfills Ezek 34:23ff).

1. Passage illustrates care of Jesus for sheep: same as that of Yahweh in Ezekiel.

2. v.16: probably refers to the Hellenistic Jews as being "not of this fold"--(the fold he is talking about: the Palestinian Jews).

   John seems interested in contrasting the lifestyles of the Jerusalem Jews and the Greek-speaking Jews, whom he calls "Hellenists". He seems to show little concern for the Gentiles, however. V.16 is probably looking forward to the time fulfilled in Acts 8ff, when Hellenistic Jews were called to be Christians as well as the Jerusalem Jews. As you will see, the author of this paper claims that The Great commission was directed at Jews scattered among the nations, and not at gentiles.

   If you insist upon seeing John 10:16 as a reference to Gentiles, which I assumed until a more careful reading of all of John, it does not disturb my claim, since the fold Jesus is discussing is composed of Jews.

Other "lost"/"sheep" passages

1. Mt 10:5-6--Twelve commissioned to go to lost sheep of the house of Israel and NOT to Gentiles.

2. Mt 15:21-28--Canaanite Woman
   1. v.24: Jesus only sent to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel."
   2. v.26: Further reluctance to heal Gentile.
3. Lk 19:1-10--Zaccheus
   1. v.9: salvation comes since Zaccheus is a Jew.
   2. v.10: This all happens since the Jewish Messiah was sent with a purpose of seeking & saving the lost--Jews who have not been following God.

4. Psa 119:176--"I have gone astray like a lost sheep."

5. Isa 53:6--"All we like sheep have gone astray."
   This is about Israel, see ch. 52.

6. Jer 50:1-7--about Babylon--v.6: "My people were lost sheep. Their shepherds led them astray." (Israel)

7. Other Psalms and places in Jeremiah speak of the Jews as sheep.

8. Mt 18:1-17, especially v.12-14. This passage renders it clear that the "lost" are those who fall away from Judaism.

Conclusions about the "lost" (or "lost sheep").

1. The term, when concerning unfaithful people, always applied to those who were part of Judaism and left God. These were the "sinners" with whom Jesus met and ate.

2. If we draw a modern parallel, "lost" means "fallen away", where God's "sheep" today are Christians. I.e., the "lost" are people who have left God.

3. If we now view Jesus as working primarily as Messiah, we do not run into the problem of ascribing Jesus' so-called mission to ourselves. Almost all of the things that Jesus did were part of His special role(s) as Messiah, role(s) that only he was capable of performing. Only he can save the lost. Only his sacrifice provides atonement. As Peter put it, Jesus is "both Lord and Messiah".

The Great Commission

Lk 24:44-49

1. v.45: Minds of the Twelve opened

2. v.46-47: New covenant is to be preached to all nations in the name of the Jewish Messiah. Gentiles were not looking for a Messiah. Rather, these men are being sent to people who had been waiting for the Messiah: the Jews.

3. Recall Joel 2:28-3:21
   1. Peter (with full knowledge of the writings concerning such things) attests in Acts 2 that Joel's prophecy is happening at Pentecost.

   2. 3:1 says that this was the time when Judah and Jerusalem were to be restored. The gentiles face harsh judgment before Yahweh (3:2ff). Note the reprise in 3:14-16 of the elements Peter recalls at Pentecost (Joel 2:28ff).

   3. v.16: Yahweh roars from Zion and thunders from Jerusalem. We will compare this later to a line from Isaiah.

4. Recall Acts 1:4-8.

   "And assembling them, He charged them, 'not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which you heard from me; that John, indeed, baptized with water, but you will be baptized with holy spirit not many days from now.'

   "Therefore, after coming together, they asked him, 'Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?'

   "Then He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father appointed by His own authority. However, you will receive power by the holy Spirit coming upon you, and you will be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria...and even to the remotest part of the land."

   1. I believe that it is commonly taught that Jesus is evasive when asked about restoring the kingdom to Israel, alleging that the apostles don't understand what the Kingdom of God is all about. I see it differently: Jesus' answer, however bizarre, is "Yes."

   2. Peter's exegesis of the Joel passage confirms this. In order to believe otherwise, one must believe that Peter was wrong in applying Joel to the Pentecost event. The connection between Joel 2, which Peter quotes because of the visible acts of God, and Joel 3 (part of which repeats ch.2) is clear.

   3. Either we must deny Peter's claim that Joel spoke about Pentecost or the Kingdom was restored to Israel on that day.

   4. Also, the Acts account of the commissioning shows that the Twelve were to be (legal) witnesses of what they had seen Jesus do and say. This is clearly not possible for us.

5. Back to Joel
   1. Joel 3 clearly elevates the Jews (or "the remnant" of Jews, see 2:32) above the gentiles at this time, which has been established as Pentecost.

   2. 3:10--"Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruning forks into spears"--a call to arms.

   3. I view this as the time from Acts 2 to Acts 9, when only Jews were part of the church. Because the Jews were God's chosen people, they were given the invitation first. When Paul comes along, he acknowledges this by always going to the Jews in the synagogues first...and then to the gentiles.

6. Recall Isa 2:2-3
   1. God's message goes out "from Jerusalem".

   2. This is normally interpreted as a prophecy concerning the Messiah.

   3. Note: The "all nations portion" is not referring here to a sending of the message, but of an attraction of the other nations at some future time to what is going on at "Yahweh's mountain". There is a time described in v.4ff in which the Jews will be seen as having rejected God for "idols of silver and gold" (2:20). They will fear God's wrath. He will "strip Jerusalem and Judah" (3:1).

   4. "Jerusalem is brought low, Judah has come to grief, for in word and deed they defiled Yahweh in open rebellion against his glory...." (3:8ff) There is a harsh judgment against the Jews which comes some time after the word of Yahweh goes out from Jerusalem.

   5. This is clearly not the same time as in Joel. There is even opposite, parallel, language to that found in Joel: cf Joel 3:10 and Isa 2:4--"They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning forks." Since Joel is happening immediately at Pentecost, we conclude that the "peace between nations" section of Isaiah must happen afterward. Isaiah is not talking about Pentecost.

   6. Isaiah's language about instruction coming from Zion and the word of Yahweh going out from Jerusalem is similar enough to Joel 3:16 to warrant further inspection.

   7. I believe that Isaiah is talking about the time, about ten years after Pentecost, when the Jews have "had their chance" to accept the Messiah. Then, God turns from the special commission to the Jews and opens the covenant to the gentiles as well. Isa 3:10-11: "Happy are the righteous! All goes well with them; they enjoy the fruit of their actions. Woe betide the wicked! All goes ill with them; they reap the reward they have earned." God is not striking down all Jews, but only the ones who do not accept him.

   8. We have a distinct problem with Isa 2:2-5 and Micah 4:1-5. Most scholars view them as inauthentic, considering them to be written during the intertestamental period. Most of the remaining scholars believe that either Micah or Isaiah was copied from the other. Those who claim Micah came first think that the editor of Isaiah summarized Micah and inserted the passage. Those who claim Isaiah came first have the evidence that Micah is more polished and developed, thus later.

      The lack of consensus over the origins of the passages has brought some to conclude that both were inserted (in whatever order), having been copied from a third source. The main problem with this theory is that there is no evidence of an outside source.

      A few others think that Micah 4:1-5 belongs at the end of Joel and that the Isa portion is authentic. So there are several theories.

      These theories arise out of the language used in the passages and the lack of literary flow within Isaiah and Micah.

      For example, if Micah 4:1-5 were removed, one one would have corrupt Israel leaving God. This image would be followed by God's calling out the remnant of believers from among the nations and restoring the sovereignty of Jerusalem. 4:13 has the people of Zion crushing its enemies. 5:7ff make it clear (see 5:2-3) that this happens after the coming of the Messiah.

      But 4:3-4's image of peace does not fit here.

      Yet Micah 4:1-5 might belong later in the book, when the author relays a vision (ch. 6ff) about Israel's rejection of God. I prefer to think this--that some pages of an early text were transposed--than that the passage must be inauthentic, since we have no MSS without the passage.

7. "Power from on high" = pentecost.

   This was the time when Peter first used the "keys to the Kingdom" (to speak to all nations of Jews).

1. In light of Lk 24, we interpret Mt 28:19 (and Mk 16:15 if it is genuine) as referring to Jews of all nations. We must see how the Twelve acted, however, to confirm this interpretation.

2. Acts 1:6-8 (see also above)

   1. Jesus was asked about restoring the kingdom to Israel.

   2. Jesus' response is for the Twelve (Eleven), as indicated by his use of "you" throughout v.8.

   3. The locations named represent the center of mainstream Judaism and centers of Hellenistic Judaism. No primarily Gentile centers are named.

   4. The expression "to the farthest point of the land" need not mean "the ends of the earth", but was used to express any remote place. Some, assuming 1:8 to be anoutline for Acts assume it to refer to Rome, but it need not refer to any place outside Palestine.

   5. After Pentecost, representatives of the Twelve were witnesses (calling themselves this) in the Jewish centers as mentioned in Acts. We interpret 1:8 to mean that the Twelve will testify to Jews everywhere. They don't go to gentile regions.

1. The Great Commission Fulfilled: Pentecost

   1. Acts 2:5--All nations flock to Jerusalem. (remnant)

   2. v.6-8--They heard and understood the message.

   3. v.9-11--It was important enough to Luke to list nations.

   4. v.17-36--Peter shows crowd that Jesus is Messiah.

   5. v.37, 41--Responded to message & became Christians.

   6. Travelers would go back to their countries with the message, and so the representative Twelve had spread the message of the Messiah's advent to "all nations" of devout Jews.

2. The Twelve From Pentecost to Paul
   1. Never mentioned as "the Twelve" in present narrative tense after Paul, and only in Acts 6 after Pentecost. Claim this is because Gentiles were allowed to become Christians from the time of Acts 9 & 10 on.

   2. Acts 3-7--stayed in Jerusalem. The Twelve did not go out to "all nations" or "into all creation" literally, but the message had gone out to all nations of Jews through the Twelve.

   3. Acts 8:1--under persecution: 12 stayed in Jerusalem.

   4. Acts 8:14-25--Peter & John go to see Samaritan (Jewish) converts.

   5. No gentile Christians until Acts 9! They still attended the synagogues and worshiped in the temple. See how the Jews reacted when Paul is thought to have brought 1 Gentile into the temple in Acts 21:27-30ff!

3. Peter Told to Teach Gentiles (Acts 10-11)

   1. 10:3-6--Cornelius has vision to get Peter.

   2. 10:9-16--Peter gets 3 identical visions to go to Gentiles.

   3. 10:19-20--Peter told by a spirit to go to Cornelius.

   4. Peter took some Jews with him as witnesses. (10:23,10:45)

   5. 10:28--Peter only went to Gentiles since told to.

   6. 10:34-35--Peter came to realize that Gentiles okay.

   7. 10:36--Jesus brought the gospel to the Jews. I.e., Peter interprets Mt 28:19 as Jews only.

   8. 10:37-43--Peter preaches, using the Keys to the Kingdom once more.

   9. 10:44-46--Gentiles get gifts of Holy Spirit. Jews amazed.

   10. 10:47--Peter pleads with Jews to let him baptize gentiles.

   11. 11:1-16--Jews hear that Gentiles heard the message (v.1) and question Peter. Peter retells story.

   12. 11:17--"Who was I that I should be able to restrain God?"

   13. 11:18-21--Jews admit that gentiles can be saved. They didn't know this until then! This was over 10 years after Mt 28:19.

   14. IMPORTANT: When God wanted Peter to know that he was to herald to Gentiles, he made sure that Peter understood. The overall tone of the history as presented by Luke is revelatory of the fact that it was not known that gentiles could become Christians.

4. Referring Back to the Gentile Dispensation in the NT

   1. No one ever refers to Mt 28:19 as including gentiles.

   2. Acts 15:7-11--Peter refers back to Acts 10 as the time when Gentiles were allowed into the covenant.

   3. Acts 15:13-14ff--James refers to Acts 10 as the time when gentiles were admitted.

   4. Rom 1:16--Paul mentions gospel is for "everyone who believes: first for the Jew and then for the Greek."

   5. Commentary:

      If Mt 28:19 was for everyone, then the Eleven (who could understand all Scripture concerning Jesus) never realized it. This view would imply that although God wanted them to understand the commission, none of the Eleven understood it--not even later on, for they never refer back to it. These eleven understood the Scriptures about Jesus which pertained to a future Gentile "dispensation" and never applied them to Mt 28:19, not even after Acts 10. None of the eleven hearers of the commission took it to include Gentiles--never in their lives.

      Some believe, however, that all of the Twelve conspired against Jesus to suppress preaching to gentiles (but then how did the G.C. get in the Bible?). If so, they kept on lying (& never repented, as far as we know). Why do people in these two schools of belief not interpret the commission through the actions of the original hearers, as is natural to do? I hold that this is because these people are bent on forcing the evangelistic interpretation on the passage. They cannot see outside of that paradigm. Therefore, they contrive interpretations which fit their doctrine, a tradition which has been around for many years.

5. Facts about the Twelve

   1. Numerous passages indicate that there were other apostles than the Twelve. The Twelve were special.

   2. 12 was an important number.
      1. When replacing Judas, 2 were qualified, but the number had to be twelve.

      2. Rev 21:12-14--The Twelve are representative of the 12 tribes of Israel: walls & gates of New Jerusalem.

      3. The Twelve will judge the 12 tribes: Mt 19:28; Lk 22:30.

      4. Yet by the time of James' death (Acts 12), there was apparently no need to replace him. They also do not refer to those remaining as "the Eleven", like they did after Judas' death. This supports the idea that the Twelve as a unit were no longer necessary. Their collective purpose had been fulfilled.

6. Other Facts and Support

   1. The book of James was written to Jewish Christians, maybe during the period before Acts 10. This book addresses only Jewish Christians and does not suggest that there are Gentile Christians.

   2. Acts 9 occurred about 10 years after Acts 2, according to most scholars.

   3. Judaizing was a problem because Gentile Christians were introduced into a society of Jewish Christians.

   4. The Didache may have been drafted to support Judaizing during the period around Acts 15. [Of course, it was edited later.] James' letter may also have been (erroneously) interpreted as supporting Judaizing. For this reason, Paul may have written the letter to the Romans, with his comments addressing the correct interpretation that James' point was that it was faith that was important and that the faith ought to be active. (Robinson, Redating the New Testament)

   5. Mt 10 and G.C. resurrection accounts have strong parallels. I claim that Jesus was telling them nothing that they didn't already know. He was urging them to continue being apostles after he left.

   6. Zech 12:1-13:6 (or 13:9)
      1. Scene is clearly Messianic
         1. 12:10--"Then they will look on me, on him whom they have pierced, and will lament over him as over an only child, and will grieve for him bitterly as for a firstborn son."

         2. 13:1--"On that day a fountain will be opened for the line of David for the inhabitants of Jerusalem to remove their sin and impurity."

      2. 12:10, 13:1, etc. make it clear that the Messiah is coming for the Jews, to remove their sins. There is here no mention of gentiles. Now this does not mean that God has excluded gentiles from his plan, but that the Messiah would come FIRST for the Jews, then as savior for all.

7. Conclusions About the Great Commission

   1. The G.C. was given for Jews, not for all.

   2. The G.C. was given to the Twelve, representatives of the 12 tribes, not to everyone.

   3. The G.C. was fulfilled at Pentecost.

   4. What Jesus said must be interpreted in light of the actions of those who heard him say it. The record of Acts shows that Jesus came first to save the Jews, then extended the covenant to all.

      I believe that the Samaritan and Ethiopian accounts were important to Luke to show that Jewish centers which did not embrace Jerusalem Judaism still received the message before the covenant was opened to the Gentiles. And a eunuch was a fringe element of Judaism...not allowed to be a full member of the old covenant.

      Note also that to these Jews it is Philip who brings the message, not one of the Twelve.

      This was an idea consistent with God's promise, which includes a period of time recognizing the specialty of the Jews as God's chosen people.

   5. The rise of Judaizing is more easily understood through this explanation, as it would be natural for the "Nazarene" Jews to assume that gentiles needed to become Jewish proselytes under the first covenant before they could enter the second. They would naturally have viewed Christianity as properly contained in Judaism.

8. Other Scriptures Untwisted

   1. 2 Cor 5:18-20. This passage has been misread to say that all Christians are Christ's ambassadors. It is therefore enjoined upon us to preach the message of reconciliation.

      Actually, Paul and Timothy are speaking about themselves. Whenever they make an important general statement, they use more generalized phrasing, such as in v.17 "if any one is in Christ". They use the simple "we", like in verses 12, 13, 16, and the like when referring to themselves, making statements that they apply personally. One may personally agree with such statements (like if I tell you that I am a college instructor), but they are not true for everyone.

   2. Phm 6. Some people construe this "sharing of your faith" verse to refer to evangelism. Paul is simply preparing his (and Timothy's) appeal to Philemon that Onesimus be taken back. He is appealing to Philemon's generosity in faith and to his love. The entire letter has nothing to do with evangelism.

   3. The Fruit Passages. These have been misinterpreted worst of all by some. Verses such as Jn 15:2 "Every branch in me which does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every one that bears fruit he prunes, so that it may bear more fruit." have been taken to refer to evangelism also. The argument goes that to bear no fruit is bad (true) and that fruit is evangelism (false), so that one must evangelize.

      The fruit, or fruit of righteousness (Phil 1:11), or fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22) are all referring to the development of Godlike qualities as we remain in Jesus. Jesus says (in Jn 15:5) that if we remain in Jesus we DO bear fruit. The works-oriented among us have tried to change this into a threat of sorts. In John 15, there is an even more specific application.

      I will provide here an exegesis of Jn 15, however, since it is apparently the most difficult passage on fruit.

      First of all, we must keep in mind the fact that Jesus' explanations of his figurative speech are always provided by John whenever Jesus speaks to his disciples. Put another way, he always explains the analogies that he makes to them. In fact, he says this when discussing the analogy of the sower. He is not trying to confuse them.

      There is no mention anywhere in John's book about fruit equating to "making disciples". Also, if we adopt this interpretation, Jesus' analogy breaks down...for in it Christians (or the apostles) are branches.

      Jesus brought up the analogy as an explanation of what He was talking about in Jn 13-16. He has two things to get across, chiefly, in these passages. The first is that he is going to personally indwell his disciples after he has gone finally (ascended) "to the Father". This is not a literal indwellment but one which will occur through the holy Spirit.

      The other concept that he is explaining is what he calls his new precept: that students of Jesus (specifically the apostles) love one another. The topics of loving Jesus, loving one another, the precept(s), God's (Jesus') love for them, and the concept of asking and receiving are all tied together. The purpose of his talk is that they love one another. (15:17; 13:34-5; 15:12; 1 Jn 3:11; etc)

      Love is the fruit (15:16-17). This is what is meant by keeping the precept(s). (13:34; 15:10-12; 1 Jn 2:3-11; 1 Jn 3:23; 1 Jn 4:7-8,12,21)

      This flows out of and is integral to "remaining in Jesus": living in love.

      This should explain the analogy well enough for one to come to an understanding that "fruit" is not "making disciples". As another point, "vine" analogies exist about Jerusalem/Israel in the Old Testament. There also, the concept of fruit is mentioned, but the idea of "disciples" would be stupid. If Israel is a vine, Jesus is the True Vine. Bearing fruit is a product, a result of remaining in Jesus (15:5) and CANNOT BE DONE without him (15:4-6).

   4. 2 Tim 2:2 has been construed so as to apply to all. In other words, we should seek to find competent men, convert them, and train them to do the same. Some groups go so far as to suggest that there ought to be people who do nothing but this. Ridiculous! In the first place, Paul has not applied the charge to everyone, but to Timothy his assistant. The passage says nothing about "converting" people. On the contrary: the people to whom Timothy is to entrust the message are to be faithful and competent to teach. The major point of Paul's first letter to Timothy was that corrupt teaching was to be avoided at all costs.

      Something similar is said of the women who are addressed in 1 Tim 2. Paul is not telling Timothy to convert and train men to teach. Rather, he charges Tim to relay the full message (as Tim heard it from Paul) to some stalwart Christians (male or female) who can also teach it.

   5. The "Jesus as an example" passages
      1. 1 Pet 2:21--"For to this you were called. Because the Anointed One also suffered on your behalf, leaving behind an example for you so that you may follow in His footsteps."

         Reading the verses surrounding this one, especially those which immediately follow, we see that Peter is not urging Christians to suffer nor to evangelize but to endure their suffering as Jesus endured his. Peter quotes from the suffering servant passage in Isa 53.

         "who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth; who, while being reviled, did not revile in return; when suffering, he did not threaten but delivered himself up to the One who judges justly;"

      2. Phil 2:5--"Let this attitude be in you which is in Anointed Jesus." The surrounding verses make the context of humbling oneself and regarding others more highly than oneself as clear as a bell. The "attitude" is not an evangelistic call. It is a view that Christians should have toward one another.

      3. 1 Jn 2:6--"Whoever claims to remain in him must walk also as he walked." This is not about evangelism either. The whole passage is talking about loving one another. The precepts mentioned in v.3,7,8, etc. are all Jesus' teachings toward loving one another. Verse 9 begins John's accurate explanation.

         The entire letter contains this admonition (see also 3:10-16, 3:22-24, 4:7-13, 4:18-21). There is no topic of evangelism in the entire passage. John concerns himself with those who have begun to claim that Jesus was not the Messiah. His reminder of the precept of love is clearly made so that none should develop sinful bad attitudes about the others. His comment in 2:6 is contained in an admonition to obey the precept of love toward one another. In this context, we must live our lives as Jesus lived his.

      4. Jesus was a Jew. He did not initiate a second covenant until his death. He did not occupy his time starting a new "religion" but faithfully lived according to the Torah. We have already seen that the Jews alone were those to whom Jesus confined his earthly ministry. He never converted a single Gentile to Judaism! He was not evangelizing as the term is today applied (find people who are not Christians and make them Christians). Rather, his role as Messiah only included retrieving those to Judaism who had fallen into the hands of the Enemy, the "fallen away Jews". Jesus' good news was not an abolition of Judaism and initiation of Christianity. Rather, it was an explanation, a fulfillment, of the Torah. Original Christianity was part of Judaism. Again, Jesus was not out there converting new proselytes. Rather, he reminded fallen away Jews of what it was all about and tried to turn those who were seeking truth toward it.

   6. Matt 11:12--"And from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been invaded, and the invaders are taking it by force." The verb biazw, invade or attack with violence appears here in the passive voice, saying then "has been invaded" rather than "has been forcefully advancing" like the NIV reads. Their error is understandable, for the middle voice and passive voice look alike. Perhaps they were trying to parallel this with a statement Jesus makes in Lk 16:16 which is similar in appearance. Scanning the contexts of each reveals that not only are the two passages different, but that Mt 11:12 must be passive and not active. After Jesus finishes his support for John the Baptist in v.14, He begins to describe and explain what He has been saying. Verses 16 through 24 focus entirely on how God's kingdom is being attacked, not on how it is attacking. "John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say he is demon possessed. The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look at him! A glutton and a wine drinker! A friend of tax collectors and sinners!'" Then he proclaims "woes" toward the cities which have rejected his good message. The emphasis is clearly on the rejection of the message, not on its spreading. But these English words have been used to insinuate that we "need to advance the kingdom".

   7. Lk 16:16 appears similar to Mt 11:12, but the context is completely different. The versions essentially agree how biazw ought to be rendered in this context. The KJV uses "every man presseth into it". Some say "presses toward it". The REB has "everyone forces a way in". The REB is in line with the meaning of the verb: "to invade".

      The passage, which begins in verse 15 reads:

      "[And] he said to them, 'You are the ones who are justifying yourselves before men; but God knows your hearts; for what is highly prized by men is an abomination in God's presence. The Torah and the Prophets were until John: since then, the good message of God's kingdom has been heralded, and everyone forces a way in. It is easier for heaven and earth to come to an end than for one letter of the Torah to pass away."

      Jesus then makes a strong statement against divorce and tells the story of the rich man and Lazarus. His point to them was that since John began preaching, there have been people fighting it by twisting the Torah and "justifying themselves before men". But "God knows their hearts". Though the passages are not parallel and the kingdom is not doing any "forceful advancing", the idea is similar to what is in Matthew: people are attacking the Messiah and his good message. The Messiah is not attacking, but his kingdom is defending from attack.

   8. 1 Cor 3:9-15 refer to the concept of building a congregation. But Paul makes a distinction between the traveling evangelists (Paul & Sosthenes, Apollos) and the building ("you") in the passage. Those part of the structure are not the "builders". The builders are the ones who have received a divine commission to teach. This is actually the third of Paul's analogies to the point that the Corinthians should not be divided by following men. He is not making an appeal to build by adding members. Rather, he says that if anyone should feed other food to the congregation (as in 3:2-3) or water the congregation (as in 3:6-9) or lay more bricks (as in 9-15), that is if anybody should teach the people, then sound teaching will remain and build up the individuals who form the congregation, but unsound teaching will not. Nowhere does Paul insinuate that "to build" is to add "members to the local congregation". The action of the traveling evangelists is their teaching. Good teaching makes people stronger.

   9. Other "building passages" (such as Eph 2:20-22 [where the illustration is made for unity], 1 Pet 2:4-18) have been forced to read the same way. These should be taken as separate analogies, since they do not all have the same thing in mind and do not match up with one another. Because of its wording, 1 Pet 2:9 has been particularly singled out as a command to evangelize. But Peter does not say that we are declaring the perfections of Jesus by word of mouth. On the contrary, according to v.11ff, our actions proclaim God's attributes. When people are around Christians, God ought to be apparent in the lives of the godly. Peter discusses godly conduct, which is proper even under persecution. His whole letter urges first century Christians, who are being persecuted, to act like Jesus did when persecuted. It does not say that we should "evangelize until persecuted" but that we should live Christian lives WHETHER PERSECUTED OR NOT.

      Other "building" passages, even Heb 3:1-6, are obvious in context.

9. Other Counter-Arguments

   1. The Ethiopian Treasurer (Ac 8:26-39) was not given any special instructions. He was in no way "trained" to evangelize.

   2. There is never anywhere given a general enjoinment to evangelize. James' letter contains over 30 admonitions of action. But it contains no command to evangelize. Nor does any other letter contain a call for all to evangelize or preach. The only other "evangelistic" passages are spoken by evangelists and apostles about themselves and one another, people who were given personal calls to preach.

10. Conclusions Concerning Evangelism

    1. John says in one of the fruit passages (Lk 3:7-9ff),

       "Do not begin to say among yourselves, `We have a father: Abraham.' For I assure you that God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham."

       The point of the entire passage is that doing God's will is what is important (bearing good fruit). If our purpose were "numbers", then God would simply "raise up children" from stones. He is not interested in how many warm bodies occupy the building each week. Nor is he interested in "your" rate of conversion, or how many people you're "studying with."

    2. Paul's excellent passages about giftedness tell us what God does desire for his disciples. Use your gifts in every manner you can to glorify God. This does not mean use them all for evangelism or any other single "focus". It means using your abilities and aptitudes with thankfulness in whatever way they are naturally used. Being a good mother, student, farm worker, baseball player, or scientist and attributing it thankfully to God is good. Within Jesus' whole body especially, when you can use your gift to benefit others, you are asked by Paul to do so. (Rom 12:6ff) "If prophecy, in proportion to your faith; or if service, in service; the teacher, in teaching; the adviser, in advice. Let the one who gives act with simplicity; the outstanding example, with diligence; the sympathizer, with cheerfulness. Love should be without hypocrisy."

    3. What is commonly termed evangelism is finding people you didn't previously know and showing them how to come to Jesus. This is good. Do it as often and as fervently as you are moved to. What I call "sharing" is basically the same thing, but with friends and confidants who can attest themselves to the change in your life that Jesus has brought. These are your friends. You care about them. If your life in the "church building" is the same as that without, your friends probably know about Jesus through being with you on an ordinary basis, whether you teach them in words or not. This is "being a light on a hill". People see it and flock to it. Your life is the witness.

    4. Remember that inviting people "to church", even your friends, is relatively unimportant compared to helping them see the truth about Jesus for themselves in the Bible.

       "Invitation" is not truly evangelism, whereas more direct sharing is. Don't hand someone an invitation. Serve him or her in love. Befriend him. I am saying these things so that you will understand that I am not railing against sharing the good message with others. Rather, I am only showing that Jesus did not order you to do it. He wants you to do the good that comes naturally (whatever that is) out of love.