Re: BIBLE:first humans

Geoffrey Horton (
Wed, 18 Sep 1996 14:28:20 -0500

Bill Hamilton and Bill Frix are having a debate that I was trying to stay
out of, but a side point of Bill Hamilton's drew me out:

> If you are involved in evangelism (I hope
> you are) you probably don't begin your witnessing to a nonbeliever by
> relating Genesis 1-3 to him. More likely you tell him that men are
> separated from God by sin, that the only remedy is Jesus' death on the
> cross, and that this remedy is a free gift you can have simply by
> confessing your sins and accepting it. This approach depends on the fact
> that most people know they are sinful.

I recently read a book called _How to Reach Secular People_ (terrible
title, good book). One of the authors' chief points was that this approach
to evangelism is no longer as useful or effective as it was. We live in an
era where guilt is no longer the chief psychogical need that people need
addressed. They are simply totally adrift and are in need of a fixed point
of reference. Jesus as the Rock is more important, _in the beginning_,
than Jesus the Reedemer.

I've thought about that and discussed it with a few friends, but I still
don't know if it's true or not. I offer it up here for your consideration
and (possible) comment.