Yesterday I listened with special interest to the Nov 6th edition of
This American Life, entitled "
Bait and Switch".
During the 2nd Act, "Raw Sex", host
Ira Glass (who identifies himself in this segment as an atheist) interviews two personalities regarding "bait and switch" evangelism. Dave Dickerson shares two experiences with Campus Crusade for Christ (I take it as a newly involved student, though the time-frame is never indicated).
Jim Henderson discusses "
doable evangelism" -- i.e., noticing others, listening to others and ____ (I forget the third element. Ah, my aging memory)--as a alternative to bait and switch approaches.
Three quick observations:
1. I appreciate and respect Ira Glass. He did an excellent job in the interviews, probing and exposing, yet not bashing. He is, of course, an entertaining radio personality and this edition of
This American Life is enjoyable and thoughtful.
2. Dickerson's interview is a good challenge to us who witness. How do we engage others openly, capturing their interest and communicating the gospel message with relevance, without slipping into the ditch of "bait and switch"? [Note: The integrity of surveys was one of the reasons we framed
QuEST (Questions Exploring Students Thinking) as,
not a survey, but an interview that would yield helpful information to be used for a variety of national purposes (which it has.) No bait and switch in this.] But this discussions should also cause us to reflect upon how others are experiencing our outreach efforts--whether young believers involved with us or the audience that we reach out to.
3. Henderson's work at normalizing relationships with those who do not (yet) know Christ and engaging them appropriately has been helpful for many. But I was most intrigued by Glass' probing if it doesn't slide into the other ditch -- all relationship, no message. Given Glass' self-disclosed unbelief, he astutely exposes relationships-only approach as "all bait, no switch." Fascinating.
But taken as a whole, the interview serves as a clear reminder that as witnesses and as those who equip and lead others in witness, we must be sensitive and appropriate with our audience, while being faithful to our Lord and his message and mission.
An excellent expression of the balance is found in Intervarsity Christian Fellowship's
"Evangelism Code of Ethics", which includes this:
We believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and affirm the role and goal of the Christian evangelist. However, we do not believe that this justifies any means to fulfill that end. Hence, we disavow the use of any coercive techniques or manipulative appeals which bypass a person's critical faculties, play on psychological weaknesses, undermine relationship with family or religious institutions, or mask the true nature of Christian conversion.
While respecting the individual integrity, intellectual honesty, and academic freedom of all other believers and skeptics, we seek to proclaim Christ openly. We reveal our own identity and purpose, our theological positions and sources of information and will not be intentionally misleading. Respect for human integrity means no false advertising, no personal aggrandizement from successfully persuading others to follow Jesus, and no overly emotional appeals which minimize reason and evidence.
Thoughts?
Posts
