Shall We Plead With Sinners?

One of the sad byproducts of this modern age where "tolerance is king" is that Christians have lost the  urgency of the Gospel message. We are so afraid of being criticized, ostracized, or marginalized that we oftentimes unintentionally make our presentation of Christ sound like something that can be taken or left with no consequence. I have read statements from so-called "Christian" mission organizations that went something like this: "We are not here to proselytize. We are just here to show the people love and compassion. If they choose to believe like us, that is fine. If not, that is fine too."

To be sure, there are some tactics being used in an attempt to reach people for Christ that are wrong and inappropriate. But just because there are unethical men who would try to bully or trick a person into making a "profession of faith," that does not mean that we should go to the other extreme and be tepid and timid in our presentation of the Gospel. There are times that a person hears the Gospel explained and readily agrees to believe on Christ. But what about the times that a person hears the Gospel and then sets up camp in the valley of indecision? How should we deal with fence-sitters? Should we leave procrastinators alone? Should we simply give them the message from God and then walk away? Is any amount of pressure justified? If so, how much? In other words, shall we plead with sinners?

Enough To Go Around

© Anatoliy Babiychuk | Dreamstime Stock Photos

In 1980, Cambodia was just emerging from one of the most horrific periods of time that any nation has ever endured. Between 1975 and 1979, the brutal Khmer Rouge regime, under the leadership of the infamous Pol Pot, abused the Cambodian people in a way that is hard to describe and even harder to comprehend. An estimated 2 million people died either of starvation, malnutrition, or disease or were killed outright by the Khmer Rouge. When the North Vietnamese defeated the Khmer Rouge in 1979 (or at least drove them out of the highly populated areas and into their jungle hideouts) they assumed by default the responsibility of picking up the pieces of the Khmer Rouge's razing of the country and its people. I recently read an account of that time in Cambodia's history and the difficulty that was faced in getting emergency aid distributed to the people, and it gave me some things to think about with relation to the Great Commission.

Rats in the Rice

When the Vietnamese rolled into town, their first task was dealing with the starvation, malnutrition and sickness that abounded on every hand at some of the greatest levels ever seen in modern history. Sadly, when foreign aid and relief began to come flooding in, they had a very difficult time getting it properly distributed to those who were in need. Ships waited for weeks to dock and unload, because of the interminably long time (mostly due to inefficiency) that it took to unload each ship. Once rice and other aid was unloaded, the distribution was just as bad, if not worse. Various aid organizations had donated 1,100 trucks for delivering food and relief supplies, but they were misappropriated, kept mostly around Phnom Penh and used for transporting people. Meanwhile, the stockpile of rice and other food items was getting infested with rats as it sat undelivered. Journalist Henry Kamm went on a 500 mile journey on the main roads and saw only 3 of the relief trucks. Every time he stopped in a village, he was told the same story: very little rations had been delivered and no seed at all. Mr. Kamm told of meeting a 25 year-old man who pedaled his bike for two weeks from Kampong Cham province to Phnom Penh in search of rice. With 80 pounds of rice strapped to his bike rack he began to push it back home. His family was waiting, he said. Instead of distributing the relief supplies and food, certain people at the top of the "food chain" were hoarding it. High ranking Cambodian officials were eating very well while the rest of the people were still starving. Many who had enough for their own family seemed unconcerned with the plight of those who had nothing.

"If King George Possessed Your Hearts"

I recently read the book "Marion And His Men" written by John De Morgan in 1802. It is the story of American Revolutionary War hero Francis Marion, who was also known as "The Swamp Fox." Marion both made his mark on the Revolutionary War and earned his moniker by his fighting tactics. He and his band of men were too outnumbered to launch a full-scale attack on the British forces, so instead they dwelt in the swamps of the Carolinas and employed guerilla warfare tactics to buy more time for General Washington. The opening line of one of the last chapters tells the whole story in one line: "Day after day Marion and his men so thoroughly harassed the enemy that Lord Cornwallis was put to his wits' end to circumvent the Americans."

Near the end of the book there is an account of a conversation that took place between Marion and a British officer who had been brought blindfolded into their encampment to work out the details of a prisoner exchange. When the meeting was over and the British officer was preparing to leave, Marion insisted that he eat a meal with them. The man was famished (the British were on limited rations as well as the Americans) so he accepted the offer. He assumed, as did many, that the patriots were living off the fat of the land; thus he was disappointed to see that their entire dinner would consist of some roasted potatoes. The patriot's cook pulled a potato from the fire, blew off the ashes, and offered it to the British officer on a piece of bark for a plate. The man tried to eat the potato, but without butter or salt he found it to be tasteless and sat the bark plate down. The conversation that ensued gives us a glimpse into why the patriot's fought, but more importantly, it provides a standard by which we might measure our fervency as soldiers of the Lord.

The Worth Of A Soul

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" (Matthew 16:26) The implication of this verse is quite stunning really. You may gain all of the wealth, riches, and treasure that this world has to offer, but if in doing so you lose your soul, then you ultimately are the loser. That is the worth of a soul to one's self. But what about the worth of a soul to God? The soul of a man is worth enough to God that He was willing to give His most precious possession, His only begotten Son, in order to redeem that soul from Hell. The worth that God places upon a soul is undeniable and undebatable. But what about the worth of a soul to you and me? I mean, how much is it really worth to us in terms of time, effort, and money to see that a soul has had every chance to not only hear the Gospel, but come to Christ?

It is one o'clock in the morning, and I can't sleep. I received word tonight that a cancer-stricken woman out in the village where we have a weekly ministry just passed into eternity. I am happy that 11 days ago she placed her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, and I am thankful that her pain and suffering are now over. Several of us visited her this past Saturday while we out in the village, and she was in horrible pain. Since then our prayer has been specifically that God would just take her home quickly, and I am relieved in my spirit that tonight He did just that.

As I meditate upon this precious soul who has passed into eternity tonight, little memories keep popping into my mind. Little things that perhaps seemed insignificant at the time, but now in hindsight I believe they played a huge role in bringing this woman to Christ. Although I have known her for about nine years, I am unsure of her name. It is very common here in Cambodia to call someone by a familial title and not their actual name. I call her Ohm (an older aunt). Here are ten factors that I believe ultimately contributed to the salvation of Ohm's precious and valuable soul. Perhaps these thoughts will encourage someone to keep sowing the seed, keep watering the seed, and not be weary in well doing.

Farmer Fred and the Three Visitors

     Once upon a time there was a farmer named Fred. Farmer Fred lived on a small farm in the heartland of the United States and had been farming for years. He understood the hard work and investment of time that was required to grow a crop. He also knew that from time to time because of a freeze, a fire, a tornado, or a drought, everything would be destroyed and he would have to start all over again. He understood and accepted that fact, because he knew that farming wasn't done in a day or a week. He knew that farming was a lifelong work, with success being the sum total of daily labor and long-term tenacity.

     One day a man dropped in for a visit with Farmer Fred. The visitor smiled real big, extended his hand, and said jovially, "I'm Big Bob". Then after a few moments of casual conversation, he got right to the point.
     "Farmer Fred," he said, "I admire your work, but it just seems so small! You know, years ago I farmed a little plot like you. I had my little farm, complete with a little red barn, a cute little silo, and a little farmhouse with a little picket fence. I grew some green beans, some corn, and a few acres of wheat. We were happy there for awhile. God was blessing our farm. But one day the thought hit me: My little 100-acre farm is so inconsequential! There are millions of acres of ground all over the world that need to be farmed. I figured if reaping a harvest on 100 acres was good, then reaping a harvest on a million acres would be outstanding!"

     While Farmer Fred was standing there listening, he was feeling a strange mix of emotions - a slight tinge of regret for the relatively little he had to show for his years of farming, and at the same time a growing admiration for this man with such a grand vision. He wanted to know about this "million-acre farm".

     "So what'd you do next?" he asked.

An Open Letter To Christian Young People In America

Dear Friend,

Recently a group of Bible-college students and graduates visited our family on the mission field. During their stay they attended several of our church services, and I asked each one of them to give their testimony to our people. Besides telling how they were saved, each of them also shared how they had surrendered their life to Christ to serve Him. Every one of the young people were either heading for Bible college, in the middle of Bible college, recently graduated from Bible college, or taking online Bible courses. 

This made a huge impact on some of our young people. One of our really faithful young ladies came to my wife and asked, "Are there any Bible colleges in Cambodia? I want to go to Bible college so bad!!!" In the few days following, several more came to me with similar sentiments. There is certainly no shortage of colleges, universities, and vocational schools in Cambodia. In fact, several of these young people are currently attending school; however, the schools (both faculty and student body alike) are generally anti-Christian. They put up with a lot. Just the mere thought of attending a school to study the Bible in a place where the teachers and students love the Lord...it seems to good to be true! We have opportunities here for people to study the Bible in an institute setting, but what these young people are enthralled by is the whole package deal - the dorms, the friendships, the daily classes, chapel services, etc. In a country where they are often ridiculed and mocked by friends, neighbors, and even family members for their stand for Christ, their dress standards, and their desire to live holy lives, to them Bible college sounds like an oasis in the desert.

A Very Inspiring Quote That Is Too Long To Tweet :)

I came across this statement by William Arthur Ward recently and loved it so much I just had to share it! When you read it the first time, it will sound nice and maybe even a bit trite. But read it again slowly, pausing to meditate and consider each phrase and what it really means. It was when I did this that the statement went from nice to profound. It is about not being content with the status quo. It is about striving for excellence instead of mere existence. In a nutshell it is about "second-mile" Christianity, as presented in the following verses.

"And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain." (Matthew 5:41)

"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might..." (Ecclesiastes 9:10)

"And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;" (Colossians 3:23)

Now for the quote...

Discouraging Times & The Christian Worker

© Ron Chapple | Dreamstime Stock Photos

If you are a Christian worker of any kind, you have faced discouraging times. I remember when we were starting the Good News Baptist Church in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Several times when it was time for our evening service, I had the church cleaned, the chairs set up, hymnbooks laid out, music playing, my sermon tucked away neatly in my Bible, and threw open the door ready to quickly step out of the way lest I be trampled by the surging throngs of people hungry to hear God’s Word! Then…(crickets chirping)…nobody came. Pastors certainly go through times when it seems like for every 1 step forward, their church takes 3 steps backwards. Missionaries no doubt feel at times that not one person in the entire country cares a whit about what they have to say. A bus captain may at times wonder why it seems the harder he works, the less interest kids seem to have. A Sunday School teacher may feel like throwing in the towel because even when their students attend the class, they don’t seem to listen to a word that is said. A soulwinner will occasionally return home with one thought on his mind: “What’s the point?”

Not The Gospel Of God Only

A Biblical Pattern For Investing In People

The ministry, by definition, is about people. While it is true that we oftentimes (of necessity) get encumbered with detail work and administrative tasks, ultimately the ministry is about people. There have been times in my ministry where I have gotten tired of people. That’s both horrible and hilarious at the same time. Horrible because the ministry is about people, and hilarious because…well, the ministry is about people. In recent years, God has used the book of I Thessalonians to teach me about the important work of investing in the people to whom God has sent me to minister. Even a casual reading of I Thessalonians reveals a very special relationship between the Apostle Paul and his beloved converts in Thessalonica. The key verse is 2:8 which says, “…we were willing to have imparted unto you, not the gospel of God only, but also our own souls…”

It is possible to win people to Christ without really investing much into them. I know because I have done it! God has convicted me at times that although I was succeeding in imparting the Gospel of God, I was failing to impart my own soul. In I Thessalonians chapter 2, God gives us a pattern for investing in the lives of people.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts – Part 7

This is part seven of a series.  The previous articles may be read here:  Introduction, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6.

Our world is rapidly changing.  With each product upgrade or advance in technology, some other product or technology breaths its last breathe.  As bigger and better hits the market, people naturally reject the old and outdated.  It is only natural then to consider the question:  What level of print quality is suitable and necessary for the Gospel message?  Can we run tracts on a copy machine or print them in one color on cheap paper?  Or does everything have to be high quality, full color, and glossy?  I have heard arguments for both views. 

I know some missionaries who hold to the view that basically anything is fine for a third-world country, and it is a waste of money to print nice tracts.  I do see their point, but we should always remember that even people in a poor country like to look at pretty things.  In fact, the majority of houses I have observed in Cambodia have pages from magazines and catalogs glued or stapled to the entire inside of their house!  It’s a poor man’s way of decorating the house, because they dislike dreary and drab as much as anybody.  On the other hand, it would put most printing projects outside of the parameters of the average missionary’s budget to try to print every piece of literature at a quality level which would impress Americans.  Obviously this is a very subjective topic, but here are three questions to consider.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts – Part 6

This is part six of a series. The previous articles may be read here: Introduction, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5. 

The next important question in this series on the philosophy of Gospel tracts is: Can a foreigner write an effective tract in a language that is not his own? 

Years ago I had a conversation with an older, veteran missionary that was a bit disconcerting to me at the time. I had been in Cambodia for about 18 months and I was telling him about a couple of tracts I had recently written. He chuckled in a very condescending way and said, “Steve, when I was young like you and just starting out, I was the same way…lots of ideas, lots of zeal. But I’ve got to tell you, years later when I looked back at some of the stuff I wrote when I was new on the field, it was HORRIBLE!” His contention was that I was wasting my time trying to write Khmer material because he felt it was impossible for a foreigner to write something that a national would be able to read and understand. 

Is that true? Is a foreigner’s attempt at writing truly an effort in futility? Or are these concerns overstated? I do understand his point. There is no doubt that as a general rule, Khmers understand Khmers better than they understand foreigners. For example, yesterday I asked a young lady what she was going to bring to our church potluck, and she said, “I think I’m going to make spay katee”. I didn’t know what she meant. I thought maybe “spay” was some kind of vegetable. “Katee” could have been a way of preparing it, or some kind of noodles, or even another kind of vegetable. But whatever it was, I knew I had never heard of it before. She seemed a little bit frustrated that I didn’t know what she meant, because she said that spay katee was a western food. When she began to explain it to me, I finally realized she was talking about spaghetti. The funny thing was – everyone in the church knew what “spay katee” was. Nobody knew what “spaghetti” was!

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts - Part 5

This is part five of a series.  The previous articles may be read here:  Introduction, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.

As I have stated previously, my ideas and views in these articles are with regards to Gospel tracts on the foreign mission field, not tracts in the United States.  Also, I want to make a clear distinction between Gospel tracts and church invitations.  I think that church invitations and Gospel tracts designed for use in the United States would typically require a very different approach in design, layout, style, and content than the ideas I am putting forth here.

Now that we have considered the validity of tracts, the content of tracts, and the importance of cultural relevance, let us move on to the next question:  Is a straightforward approach better, or is it better to ease into the message?

My opinion is that there is a time and a place for both styles of tracts.  I like to use straightforward tracts for people who already have some interest in Jesus Christ.  There are times when a person is literally asking for information about Christianity or asking good questions about Jesus and it seems a waste of time to give them a tract that beats around the bush.  For this purpose, a few years ago I wrote a tract called "Five Questions About Jesus".  This would be a perfect example of a straightforward tract.  It just tells you right on the front cover what it is about, and interestingly enough, this tract is one of the tracts that people like to use the most.  

On the other hand, many (perhaps even most) of the people with whom we come in contact are not yet interested in Christ.  They need a tract which will engage them by way of some question, statement, or topic which grabs their attention and compels them to read further.  I call those kind of tracts “back door" tracts.  The purpose of this type of tract is the same as any other tract – to get inside of a person’s heart and mind with the truth of God’s Word.  But since they often don’t throw open the front door of their mind with enthusiastic interest, we have to go through the “back door” instead.

By the way, God is the originator of the “back door” tract.  You probably already knew this, but the book of Esther doesn’t mention the word “God” even one time in 10 chapters.  Yet God’s sovereignty, wisdom, providence, grace, and power are seen all throughout.  This shows us that it is possible to get a point across with a subtle approach.

How do you know which kind of tract to use?  Here are four very simple thoughts to keep in mind.

The Missionary's Message

Several weeks ago I wrote an article called “Cool?!”  If you have not read that article and the subsequent comments, you won’t fully understand this post.  This post is a continuation of the comments on the other post.  The reason I am posting this as a new article instead of in the comments section is that my reply is way too long to fit in the comment box.  Also it will save readers the time of having to scroll through all of the other comments to get to the newer comments.  By posting this as a new article I am in no way saying that my comments are more important than anyone else’s, but am simply trying to streamline the process for my readers.  If you would like to read the post and comments that are the precursor to this article click here.  Otherwise, just read on.

Dear Colin,

Before delving into the heart of the matter at hand, I would like to say a couple of things regarding the context and content of my article and your subsequent comments.

First, I would like to commend you for defending your friend, Tith Chandara.  Loyalty is an admirable trait, and I appreciate what you have tried to do to invest in the future of this young man and many others.  I have read through a couple more issues of LIFT since this article, most recently the expanded issue about the job market. I am grateful for the work you are doing to help give Cambodian young people a vision for their life. 

I do think that you read way too much into my blog post with regards to your reporter, Tith Chandara.  It was not in any way, shape, or form meant to demean or belittle him as a person.  My article was simply using some of his statements to make a point about an over-arching mindset towards religion.  It had nothing to do with him as a person.  From the way you describe him, he does indeed sound like a delightful young man.  I am sure if I met him that I would like him.  I am also sure that if I met him I would tell him about the Lord Jesus Christ.  If you will read the rest of this post, you will see why I must tell him about Jesus, and why it is not an arrogant thing to do but a kind thing.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts - Part 4

This is Part 4 of a series.  The previous parts to this series can be read here.

Introduction, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

The next question that I would like to discuss is:  “How important is cultural relevance, and is there a “silver bullet”?

In the last decade, the term “cultural relevance” has become quite a buzzword.  Many churches and ministries have used the term to try to convince people to attend their church, conference, concert, etc.  On the other hand, some have lambasted the term as a sure-fire sign that someone is a liberal compromiser.  I would like to examine the meaning, the misuses, and the merits of the term to see how important cultural relevance is (or isn’t) in the writing of Gospel tracts.

The Meaning Of The Term

So, what exactly IS cultural relevance?  Let’s take one word at a time, then put them together.  Cultural means “relating to a certain culture”.  Relevance means “the sensible or logical connection that one thing has with another.”  So cultural relevance is “the sensible or logical connection that one thing has with a certain culture”.  In other words, to be culturally relevant is to make a logical connection between an idea and a given audience.  In means to show a certain group of people why an idea or product is right for them.  If we are culturally relevant preachers of the Gospel, it simply means that we present our message in such a way that it connects with the people to whom we are ministering. 

Taken at face value, the term “cultural relevance” is a perfectly legitimate and even a wise approach to ministry.  After all, does anyone preach with the goal of making the message as disconnected and uninteresting as possible to his audience?  Why then has the term become so repulsive to some fundamental Baptists?  It might have something to do with the next point.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts Part 3

This is Part 3 of a series.  To read the introduction to this series click here.  To read Part 1 click here.  To read Part 2 click here.

Does every Gospel tract need to present the Gospel in its entirety?  There are many tracts out there which do not actually present the plan of salvation, but some other Biblical truth.  There are other tracts which present some aspect of the Gospel, but really do not present the entire Gospel in a way that a person could understand and get saved simply from reading the tract.  Is this valid?  Or does every Gospel tract need to present "the whole story"?  In order to properly consider this question, we must first consider the different ways of presenting the Gospel.

There are many different approaches and “plans” that people use to present the Gospel, but there are two approaches which I consider to be extreme.  One is what I call the “5-Minute Approach”.  This is also know as the “1-2-3, Repeat-After-Me Approach”.  This approach consists of running quickly through a few verses in Romans then leading the person in a prayer.  The second is what I call the “65-Lesson Approach”.  This one is particularly popular on the mission field where many believe that a person must be taught numerous Old Testament stories first so that they can understand the significance of Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross.  One very popular series used for evangelism has the story of Adam and Eve boiled down to a mere 7 lessons!  In case you are wondering, I don’t go for either one of these approaches.  I find both of them to be extreme, and I believe there is a happy medium.  I plan to share some further thoughts on this issue in a later article, but for now I simply wanted to present these 2 approaches in light of this article on the philosophy of Gospel tracts.  A person’s philosophy of Gospel tracts will undoubtedly grow out of their philosophy on presenting the Gospel.  So let us return to the question at hand:  Does every Gospel tract need to present the Gospel in its entirety? 

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts Part 2

This is the third article in a series.  To read the Introduction, click here.  To read Part 1, click here.  The next question I would like to address is:  How much Bible must be in a tract?

A few years ago, a tract-printing ministry in the United States sent me some Vietnamese tracts to use here in Cambodia, and they also asked if I would send them a good tract in Khmer that they could print.  They were very nice people, and their desire to be a blessing was evident.  I sent them a tract I had just written, but they declined to print it.  Their reason:  not enough verses in it.  They tried to add in a bunch of verses, but their tract template was just to small to contain it all.  I was not upset as they had a right to their own opinion regarding the content of their tracts, so I went ahead and printed the tract myself locally.  They wanted more Bible verses and less explanation.  I wanted less Bible verses and more explanation.  But this was not the first time I had faced this issue.

The first time was when I arrived in Cambodia nearly 10 years ago.  There were not yet very many good tracts, and many of the missionaries were using Gospels of John for tract distribution.  As I participated, I began to inwardly question the effectiveness of what we were doing.  I almost felt guilty about questioning it, because I didn’t want to suggest that God’s Word was weak or ineffective.  I believe the Word of God is powerful, and it is never a bad idea to place a whole Bible, a portion of a Bible, or even one verse of the Bible into someone’s hands.  There is no way that we could know what has already been going on in that person's life and how God may use His Word to speak to them.  On the other hand, it seemed to me that for the vast majority of people who knew NOTHING of Christ or the Bible, we could do better than simply handing someone a “colorless, non-attractive, difficult to understand book with no pictures”.  (I don’t view the Bible in this wayJ…this is how THEY viewed it).

After struggling with some mixed-emotions and praying about the correct approach, God directed me to Acts chapter 8.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts Part 1

The first question that I would like to address is:  Are Gospel tracts a vital tool or a waste of time?  I have heard people, even former missionaries, say that Gospel tracts are just a waste of time in an illiterate country.  They cite two main reasons as proof:  First, it is a waste of time to pass out tracts in a country where so many people are illiterate.  Second, even the people who know how to read just throw the tracts away, because they are not interested in reading about Christianity.

There is no doubt that those objections do bear some legitimacy, as I can attest to myself.  But let’s consider the objections individually.  Regarding the issue of literacy, let me give an illustration in order to disarm their argument.  I have six children, only three of whom know how to read.  That’s 50%.  But today I bought a bunch of used books for my children.  If we followed the logic of some, then I wasted my money since only 50% of my children are literate.  But I didn’t buy the books for the ones who can’t read.  I bought them for the ones who CAN!  Of course, the illiterate people in Cambodia can’t read our tracts, but there are millions of people who CAN read.  The tracts are for them!  You may say that it is not a fair comparison, because my younger children can’t read only because they haven’t yet learned.  But I can assure you that I would have purchased the books, even if I knew that the three younger children would never learn to read.  Why?  Because the books were for the ones who can read.  I don’t understand the logic that says since some people cannot read, don’t give literature to anybody. 

Their second main objection is that even the people who CAN read just throw the tracts on the ground.  Again, there is some legitimacy to that concern.  One of the first tract distribution efforts with which I was involved here in Cambodia was a major flop.  A very high percentage of the tracts were tossed to the ground without even being opened.  We analyzed and adjusted and tried again with much better success the next time.  However, I believe that it is a mistake to think that just because some tracts are thrown away that it is a poor method.  In the parable of the sower, there were 4 kinds of ground.  How many of the 4 were good ground?  That’s right, just one!  So in this Bible parable about sowing the Word of God (which is exactly what one is doing when passing out Gospel tracts), a full 75% of the ground upon which the seed fell was not good ground.  I don’t think that this percentage (25% good ground) is necessarily a magic formula or a threshold of receptivity that must be reached.  It does, however, give us a Biblical principle to guide our efforts.  That principle is that we should not be dismayed, disheartened, discouraged, or even surprised when a large percentage of the tracts we distribute get tossed aside and are never read.  We are looking for the good ground, but are under no illusions that it is all good ground.

The Philosophy of Gospel Tracts Introduction

I suppose any person who has been around evangelical Christianity for any length of time is familiar with the practice of passing out Gospel tracts. Over the past 15 years or so, I have had conversations with many people, including numerous pastors and missionaries, about the philosophy of Gospel tracts. During the course of these conversations, several main issues have come up time and again. These issues are:

1. Are Gospel tracts a vital tool or a waste of time?

2. How much Bible must be in a Gospel tract?

3. Does every Gospel tract need to present the Gospel in its entirety?

4. Is a straightforward approach better, or is it better to “ease into” the message?

5. How important is cultural relevance, and is there a “silver bullet”?

6. What level of quality is suitable and necessary to the Gospel message?

7. Can a foreigner write an effective tract in a language that is not his own?

8. Should we print tracts in America and then ship them, or print them on the field?