Street preaching: Is it a useful means of evangelism?

philologos

This has been on my mind as a topic to discuss for a long time.

Since I've moved to London, I've noticed a lot more street preaching in a variety of areas from Speakers Corner in Hyde Park to my local high street on the weekends, or even outside the train station on weekdays as commuters are coming out.

Street preaching is something that I've had mixed opinions on. When I first became a Christian I would say that I would have had a more negative opinion of it than I do now. I would have questioned it's effectiveness, but at the same time I read time and time again in Scripture where street preaching took place. We can look to Paul at the Areopagus in Athens (Acts 17), Peter and the Apostles in Jerusalem and indeed Jesus Himself on numerous occasions.

Do you think street preaching no longer has a purpose in the 21st century, or do you think it has a firm place amongst other forms of evangelism?

Personally, I've warmed up to the idea in recent times. The only reason as far as I can see that street preaching isn't effective is because of the methodologies used in doing so rather than the act itself.

Zombrex

As an atheist who has failed to be converted by the many street preachers I've meet (go figure) street preaching always left me with the impression that it was more for the street preacher than for the people he is trying to educated.

That goes for all street preaching by the way, including atheist street preaching.

Something like the Gideon's putting Bibles in hotel rooms would to my mind seem a better use of time.

Wereghost

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Street preachers are an annoyance. I don't see anyone but the very impressionable being swung by their sermons, which seem to usually have much of the character of a rant based on misinterpretations.

MrPudding

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Even when I was a believer I was not keen on the street preacher. I think a large part of that was that I was raised as a catholic and the street preachers in my area of Norn Iron were venomous and nasty protestant preacher who would actively harass and abuse passers by.

Now that I am an atheist I probably have an even lower opinion of them. They always seem to have an air of desperation about them.

As a tool for recruitment / conversion does it actually work? I would have thought that something more personal and less in your face would be more effective.

The Alpha Course, for example, seems to be reasonably successful, though I happen to think that is quite insidious.

MrP

Doctor DooM

Other opinion (please elaborate)

I don't like being chugged, for money or my soul.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Other opinion (please elaborate)

I think there's a big difference between a chugger and a street preacher.

I don't think they have much of an effect to be honest. I mean, when I see one, my first reaction is, "Oh, God, not another deluded idiot" - and I see myself more of a panthiest than an athiest. And this is before I've even listend to what they have to say.

The porblem is that we live in more cinical and better-informed times where people have better access to information and can check things up for themselves. For that reason, anyone promoting a religion really has to knwo their stuff and come accross as well-informed and intelligent. Standing on a box at the corner of a street and preaching is not going to give you that impression.

lmaopml

I think it depends on what form it takes Phil. It can be useful if it inspires joy and lifts the spirits of those passing by.....and holds their interest.

The Hare Krishnas seem to get lots of notice with their drums and dancing..lol....maybe a good gospel choir along with free invitations to attend a talk would be better than a solitary person who can sometimes have the opposit effect of making people turn away....

We don't see much street preaching in Dublin. There was a lady many years ago who used to bless everybody passing by on Grafton street at the lights, but people thought she was weird..lol...and she did come across as a bit of an oddity, nice, but odd.

If it's somebody just shouting random passages from Scripture, or not being coherent, than people will just pass on by...

Or perhaps (as Mr. Pudding suggests) somebody being venemous or shouting at people to hold onto their socks the end of world is nigh type preaching can be a real turn off.

If there is a little joy and music or something extra in there to hold peoples interest, than I think it can be useful.

Doc Farrell

Other opinion (please elaborate)

From my limited knowledge of them, street preachers seem to be obsessed with the negative, with sin, eternal damnation, fear.
Whereas the only teachers I read or listen to are obsessed with the positive aspects of Christianity. The positive types are normally part of a larger society or organisation and have little trouble working as well as preaching.
While the negative fear mongering types seem to be lonely and strange.
could be wrong though.....

Edit: I just noticed that you said it better lmaopml

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Manach

One positive is there are willing to engage in discussion of various issues. Given the relative decline in basic education in the West, they sometimes can debate the issues at a 1:1 level instead of being content to spin the news like modern politicians who do not interact with the public instead relying on ad-campaigns.

Doctor DooM

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I think there's a big difference between a chugger and a street preacher.

They generate similar low levels of annoyance in me, and I think that's the important thing in answer to Phil's question.

The Quadratic Equation

No

I don't mind street preaching at all. It would be a dull word without it. Fair play to those who are different and brave enough to do it. I'm a little tired of the carbon copy conformist 'celebrity' culture and image. I always like to hear other opinions/persectives/angles, and that does not threaten what I believe, in fact sometimes it may iluminate another aspect of it for me. Freedom of speech is central to any democracy. It's the quality of street preaching I would have an issue with, and it should focus much more on joy, God's eternal love and loving one another, whether they be Christian, Atheist, or any other creed or race. Seperated or not, we are still all brothers and sisters and children of God.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Doctor DooM wrote: »

They generate similar low levels of annoyance in me, and I think that's the important thing in answer to Phil's question.

I see your point, but in terms of the question, there goal is different. The chugger probably doesnt really care about savign the animals or the red cross, or whoever, he just does a job for payment. In that respect, I think the question of its evectiveness as a means of evangelism (i.e., communicating a message) there is a difference.

philologos

No

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message. Claiming that people are obsessed with sin seems a little off when it is mans biggest problem and why we need salvation.

In terms of volume of people it's really incomparable to other means.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Other opinion (please elaborate)

philologos wrote: »

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message. Claiming that people are obsessed with sin seems a little off when it is mans biggest problem and why we need salvation.

In terms of volume of people it's really incomparable to other means.

"Warned" is a pretty harsh word there and implies a little arrogance. If you want to communicate a message you first need to accept people as equals.

philologos

No

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

philologos wrote: »

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message. Claiming that people are obsessed with sin seems a little off when it is mans biggest problem and why we need salvation.

In terms of volume of people it's really incomparable to other means.

"Warned" is a pretty harsh word there and implies a little arrogance. If you want to communicate a message you first need to accept people as equals.

We are equals. We all have sinned. We all need to accept Christ to be saved. We'll all be judged on the same criterion. That is do we know Him?

Jesus said he was the only way to know God and be saved from the slavery of sin.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Other opinion (please elaborate)

philologos wrote: »

We are equals. We all have sinned. We all need to accept Christ to be saved. We'll all be judged on the same criterion. That is do we know Him?

Jesus said he was the only way to know God and be saved from the slavery of sin.

Not the point I made, my point was regarding the language you used to convey this message. Whether you choose the street, the internet a church, whatever, you need to make sure that you don't come across as being better or more arrogant, or you'll wind up preaching to the choir, as the phrase goes.

Onesimus

No

One thing we have to Understand about St.Paul is that this was just the beginning of Christianity and it had to be preached no matter what.

That said I do think that street preaching can be effective in as much as it presents God to each individual. The methods used by preachers in New York such as ''Repent for the day of the Lord is at hand'' can be useless. But I remember being in the city before I was converted and this guy just had leaflets and a table of them set up, he would just invite people who passed to take one and that was that. I think that is a good idea as although it didnt convert me right away ( mind you I believed there was a God ) it did get me thinking about God and started the ball rolling and now here I am.

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI said that we must present the Gospel to everyone no matter the consequences, we must present Jesus to the people both in word and deed. It is then up to each individual to accept or reject that invitation. We may think it's useless and yet if just one soul amongst the crowd is listening it is better than nothing at all as each soul to Christ is worth more than we think.

So yes it is effective when done properly but as Zombrex said some just do it to satisfy their ego but even if that is the case God always draws the good out of a bad intention and convert someone even through the man who only does it to satisfy his ego.

Zombrex

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Not the point I made, my point was regarding the language you used to convey this message. Whether you choose the street, the internet a church, whatever, you need to make sure that you don't come across as being better or more arrogant, or you'll wind up preaching to the choir, as the phrase goes.

Yes, shouting "whores" at girls on a night out, as I've seen on Grafton Street, is probably not the best way to demonstrate that everyone is a sinner and everyone needs to be saved.

Again street preaching seems to be more about the preacher proclaiming his judgement and righteousness, than any selfless act to convert others.

I'm sure their are genuine street preachers. But given how ineffective street preaching is, and how out of date it is (is the problem really that people in this country don't now what Christianity is, rather than know too much about what it is), I think those with genuine desire to bring people into the Christian religion devote their time to other more effective methods.

The Quadratic Equation

No

Zombrex wrote: »

(is the problem really that people in this country don't now what Christianity is, rather than know too much about what it is)

It never ceases to amaze me the misconceptions and myths people have about Christianity and Catholicism in particular. Boards.ie bears that out. I have no problem with other peoples beliefs, but I do think that if you are going to disagree with other peoples beliefs, I believe should you should start by at least getting what they actually believe correct. Perhaps quality street preaching could go a little way to addressing that.

Zombrex

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me the misconceptions and myths people have about Christianity and Catholicism in particular. Boards.ie bears that out. I have no problem with other peoples beliefs, but I do think that if you are going to disagree with other peoples beliefs, I believe should you should start by at least getting what they actually believe correct. Perhaps quality street preaching could go a little way to addressing that.

Perhaps, though I think quality and street preaching is a bit of an oxymoron.

These misconceptions, in my experience at least, tend to be in the details (no Sodom was the sin of being unwelcoming, no! Cain and Abel had sisters, no! the emasculate conception refers to Mary not Jesus), not the basic idea that we are all sinners and need Jesus, which is basically all you get from a street preacher shouting sound bytes at you.

Like I said if the issue was educating people to the nuanced nature of Christian belief I don't think they would choose to do that as a street preacher.

Besides any street preacher I've engaged I've ended up knowing more than them.

Fanny Cradock

I wonder if it isn't counter-productive - at least when you are dealing with the firebrand type preachers.

homer911

Whenever I've been in London at the weekend I've made a point of visiting Speaker's Corner. Its the interaction with the audience that's most engaging and any street preacher's I've seen in Ireland haven't had that opportunity as the locations are never appropriate.

I'd love to see a Speaker's Corner in Stephen's Green on a Sunday afternoon - it doesn't have to be only only for Christians

philologos

No

homer911 wrote: »

Whenever I've been in London at the weekend I've made a point of visiting Speaker's Corner. Its the interaction with the audience that's most engaging and any street preacher's I've seen in Ireland haven't had that opportunity as the locations are never appropriate.

I'd love to see a Speaker's Corner in Stephen's Green on a Sunday afternoon - it doesn't have to be only only for Christians

Some speakers are good. I've heard better preaching in and around my local area. I've definitely warmed up to the idea recently but like others have said the quality must be good also.

I think it is one means of proclamation that should be used amongst others and that it is not for everyone.

Doctor DooM

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I see your point, but in terms of the question, there goal is different. The chugger probably doesnt really care about savign the animals or the red cross, or whoever, he just does a job for payment. In that respect, I think the question of its evectiveness as a means of evangelism (i.e., communicating a message) there is a difference.

The motivation doesn't change the irritation

philologos wrote: »

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message. Claiming that people are obsessed with sin seems a little off when it is mans biggest problem and why we need salvation.

I am reasonably sure if you announced something along those lines to 99% of my non religious friends as they passed on a street it'd just annoy them, even the more thoughtful ones who would be happy to discuss it on their own time. I'm just being honest here.

Doc Farrell

Other opinion (please elaborate)

I voted wrong! Lol! I meant to vote number three! Of course explaining what Christianity is is a good thing! Through any written or spoken word or action is fine providing the Christianity is one true to the New testament. Good News not relatively bad news. I know it's only a little poll on an Internet site but change my vote!

....this is why I didn't vote on that other poll, that one went nowhere fast....

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Doctor DooM wrote: »

The motivation doesn't change the irritation

I know, but it's more relevant to the question asked :)

philologos

No

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I am reasonably sure if you announced something along those lines to 99% of my non religious friends as they passed on a street it'd just annoy them, even the more thoughtful ones who would be happy to discuss it on their own time. I'm just being honest here.

It's fine that you think that. I mainly geared this question for Christians, given the strong case for street preaching that is in the Bible. Several of the Old Testament prophets, and the Apostles, and even Jesus Himself used the means of street preaching. Many people hated them, others came to know Christ through it.

What was different about it then, and what is different about it now.

I think people have also misunderstood what I meant by evangelism. Simply put I mean sharing the word with others. That might be by putting the seed into peoples minds for the first time to think about deeper things then through God's work bringing that person to Him. Jesus in the New Testament describes it as being similar to a harvest in several of the Gospels. (John 4:31-45).

I'm quite happy to say that much of the methodologies involved with street preaching are wrong, but personally I can't reject the practice given it's place in the early church.

rich.d.berry

Other opinion (please elaborate)

My experience has been very negative. Any street preaching that I have witnessed has been confrontational and has had the effect of alienating the speaker from the passers by. I have never heard anyone who's drawn me to what they are saying.

I am of the opinion that these type of activities are dominated by the lunatic fringe. Who in their right mind stands up in public to make a spectacle of themselves to have abuse hurled back? Wannabe martyrs perhaps?

No, not my cup of tea at all!

prinz

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Street preaching tends to get on my nerves. It's often hard to follow, verging on incoherent ramblings. As someone said earlier on the thread, I think it's done more for the benefit of the preacher than the passers-by. They must get some kick out if it. There are a couple I see around Dublin city centre and I can't see any real success coming from it. However I do thing there is room for getting some interaction and discussion going with people on the street.

Personally I think some of the Christian street preachers could put down the megaphone and learn a thing or two from the young men who man the Islam information table outside the GPO. The passers-by approach them if they want to talk about something/learn something about Islam, it's a lot better IMO than having a garbled semi-message shouted into their ears as they keep walking. This approach seems to be more common on the continent too for Christian communities (less street preaching more distribution of leaflets/invitations to coffee evenings etc)

PDN

philologos wrote: »

It's fine that you think that. I mainly geared this question for Christians, given the strong case for street preaching that is in the Bible. Several of the Old Testament prophets, and the Apostles, and even Jesus Himself used the means of street preaching. Many people hated them, others came to know Christ through it.

What was different about it then, and what is different about it now.

What is different is culture. Some cultures value decisions that are made by an entire group, whereas others value decisions that are made individually.

In many parts of the world street preaching can be an effective way to communicate the Gospel. It can enable a family, clan or tribe to hear a message and respond to it together.

Like it or not, we live in a culture where decision making is highly individualistic. Therefore the Gospel tends to be shared more effectively through networks of relationships more than in street preaching.

antiskeptic

No

philologos wrote: »

We can look to Paul at the Areopagus in Athens (Acts 17), Peter and the Apostles in Jerusalem and indeed Jesus Himself on numerous occasions.

There you have it...

I'm not inclined to suppose the mechanism of salvation has altered in time so would suppose this as effective as it ever was. Issues?

1) What should you preach (there was a guy at the junction of Henry St. / O'Connell St preaching hellfire and damnation a while back. He'd a terrible amp though so all you could hear was noise.

2) Whether you suppose (as Zombrex seems to for example) such preaching will produce converts by means of straight rational argument. In this case I'm imagine both Zombrex and the preacher disappointed (in the "it didn't do what it says on the tin" sense of the word )

Zorbas

Other opinion (please elaborate)

All religions require adherents to try to recruit more to join their religions and by whatever legal means possible so street preaching has a role as one way to success.
As someone who at one time attended 3 church services on a Sunday I feel that the whole process of indoctrination is destructive and contrary to natural good instincts which we are born with. Religion is detrimental to good community and as we continue to understand the falsehoods of religion from creationism on then we reject it as a force for negativity and guilt. People increasingly free themselves up to believe in the innate goodness of people.

PDN

Zorbas wrote: »

All religions require adherents to try to recruit more to join their religions and by whatever legal means possible so street preaching has a role as one way to success.
As someone who at one time attended 3 church services on a Sunday I feel that the whole process of indoctrination is destructive and contrary to natural good instincts which we are born with. Religion is detrimental to good community and as we continue to understand the falsehoods of religion from creationism on then we reject it as a force for negativity and guilt. People increasingly free themselves up to believe in the innate goodness of people.

Moderator's warning
Zorbas, please view this as your one and only get out of jail free card.

Generalised slurs against religion are considered contrary to the Forum Charter (which I strongly urge you to read) and as such will attract infractions.

If you wish to discuss this, or any other moderating action, please do so via PM so as not to derail this thread.

God Bless You.

edanto

philologos wrote: »

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message.

Actually, I disagree, and would also suggest that if you were to preach the above from a street corner, people would think you were very arrogant.

Personally, I think the core of the Christian message is to treat others as you would like to be treated. I can safely presume that you would not want someone of different beliefs telling you that your faith will lead to eternal suffering. So, why threaten other people with the same fate?!

You might get a better reaction if you preached that your God loves all people equally no matter what the person believes in.... but then again, I don't know if that's what you believe.

I'm reluctant to subscribe to the 'love me and eternal bliss awaits, but eternal pain waits for those that don't believe' worldview since it seems rather manipulative, contrived and very un-Christian.

PDN

edanto wrote: »

I can safely presume that you would not want someone of different beliefs telling you that your faith will lead to eternal suffering.

Knowing philologos and having met him, I don't think you can safely assume that at all.

philologos

No

edanto wrote: »

philologos wrote: »

I think people need to be warned that denying Jesus will lead to condemnation and accepting him leads to eternal life. This is the core of the Christian message.

Actually, I disagree, and would also suggest that if you were to preach the above from a street corner, people would think you were very arrogant.

Personally, I think the core of the Christian message is to treat others as you would like to be treated. I can safely presume that you would not want someone of different beliefs telling you that your faith will lead to eternal suffering. So, why threaten other people with the same fate?!

You might get a better reaction if you preached that your God loves all people equally no matter what the person believes in.... but then again, I don't know if that's what you believe.

I'm reluctant to subscribe to the 'love me and eternal bliss awaits, but eternal pain waits for those that don't believe' worldview since it seems rather manipulative, contrived and very un-Christian.

I don't argue that God doesn't love us. I argue that He did so much that He died for us when we rejected Him. We also were born again by his Resurrection.

This doesn't change Christianity though. We have a choice either to accept Jesus as our Lord or deny Him. Both have a consequence according to the Gospel.

I'm trying my best to understand street preaching from a Biblical POV. PDN and others have helped me.

homer911

edanto wrote: »

Personally, I think the core of the Christian message is to treat others as you would like to be treated.

Actually the core of the Christian message is to love the Lord your God. Secondary to that is to love your neighbour

Matthew 22: 37-40

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’/B][URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+22&version=NIV#fen-NIV-23910c"][COLOR=#651300][B]c[/B][/COLOR][/URL][B 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’/B][URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+22&version=NIV#fen-NIV-23912d"][COLOR=#651300][B]d[/B][/COLOR][/URL][B 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

Zorbas

Other opinion (please elaborate)

So sorry to upset the PM with what he/she feels are slurs on religion. Of course we all believe in the goodness of religion and how you can only be saved through it, there were some mistakes along the way like creationism etc but they didnt do anyone any harm at all at all. May your god bless you also and always.

strobe

philologos wrote: »

I would have questioned it's effectiveness, but at the same time I read time and time again in Scripture where street preaching took place. We can look to Paul at the Areopagus in Athens (Acts 17), Peter and the Apostles in Jerusalem and indeed Jesus Himself on numerous occasions.

Personally, I've warmed up to the idea in recent times. The only reason as far as I can see that street preaching isn't effective is because of the methodologies used in doing so rather than the act itself.

I think you have to take something into consideration in relation to the Apostles street preaching and people preaching nowadays. The Apostles were talking about a story that not everyone had heard. It was still fresh and contemporary. You'd be walking down the street and Paul would start speaking of Jesus and you'd think "ohh yeah, I heard something about of this stuff down the baths, maybe I'll stop and get the low down". Where as nowadays people are walking along and someone's talking about Jesus and it's, "Jesus huh? Yeah, heard this stuff loads of times". You can't expect to be able to grab peoples attention in the same way.

You are also talking about a time without the printing press and tv and radio etc so it seems reasonable to me that people would naturally be more willing to stop and listen to someone getting up and speaking in public as it would be a way of getting news or opinions that you mightn't come by any other way.

homer911 wrote: »

Whenever I've been in London at the weekend I've made a point of visiting Speaker's Corner. Its the interaction with the audience that's most engaging and any street preacher's I've seen in Ireland haven't had that opportunity as the locations are never appropriate.

I'd love to see a Speaker's Corner in Stephen's Green on a Sunday afternoon - it doesn't have to be only only for Christians

I think this is a really cool idea. Have a designated place for whoever wants to to stand up and speak for an hour or two about whatever they are passionate about. Like the way the buskers have Grafton St. Have a big area with little podiums spread through it in one of the parks or something.

philologos

No

strobe wrote: »

I think you have to take something into consideration in relation to the Apostles street preaching and people preaching nowadays. The Apostles were talking about a story that not everyone had heard. It was still fresh and contemporary. You'd be walking down the street and Paul would start speaking of Jesus and you'd think "ohh yeah, I heard something about of this stuff down the baths, maybe I'll stop and get the low down". Where as nowadays people are walking along and someone's talking about Jesus and it's, "Jesus huh? Yeah, heard this stuff loads of times". You can't expect to be able to grab peoples attention in the same way.

You are also talking about a time without the printing press and tv and radio etc so it seems reasonable to me that people would naturally be more willing to stop and listen to someone getting up and speaking in public as it would be a way of getting news or opinions that you mightn't come by any other way.

Firstly. Many people in Ireland, the UK and other countries may have heard trickles about Jesus, but nothing substantive about why He came, died for our sin, and that His Resurrection caused us to be born again through Him. They may know parts of the Gospel narrative, but know absolutely nothing about how it is relevant, or how it changes lives forever. Likewise, until I was about 17 and I finally read the Bible for myself, I heard trickles about Jesus, but I didn't know anything substantive about it other than that it was a nice story in some ways.

Secondly, for many people even in our societies the true meaning of Jesus is fresh. While at university I saw a number of people who had their perspective on Jesus completely changed by simply coming to hear about the Bible and read it for themselves.

strobe

philologos wrote: »

Likewise, until I was about 17 and I finally read the Bible for myself

While at university I saw a number of people who had their perspective on Jesus completely changed by simply coming to hear about the Bible and read it for themselves.

Well that's my point. What I said was in relation to street preaching. Had you never passed a street preacher in the previous 17 years? Had the people you knew in university never done so? The difference is you and they had decided to investigate all that jazz already. Street preaching seems to be more about targeting people who are on their way to buy some groceries etc. You just can't expect it to have the same effect it would have had in 'biblical times'. I mean I'm fairly certain that a chap standing up and talking about anything original and contemporary at all would have more chance of getting people to stop and genuinely listen than anybody talking about anything fatigued and overplayed.

But I mean, in anyways, surely you believe that any method of spreading the message will/can be effective 'cause the Holy Spirit is there helping things along?

philologos

No

Not that I recall. That doesn't mean that it is ineffective however. We still have the question as to the Biblical practice of street preaching. I'm with antiskeptic on this one for the most part. I don't think the means to salvation has changed. I'm also with PDN in that I think that our culture differs to the one that was in the time of Jesus, or of the Apostles.

I do still think that as a means of mass-proclamation it could still be important provided it is done in a Biblical manner. People can follow up what they hear for themselves should they be willing to.

As I've explained already, the Gospel to many in society is fresh. There is much in there that people will have never heard before, particularly given the levels of Biblical illiteracy here. See the links in this post.

strobe

No man, I get what you are saying about people not having an in depth understanding of Christianity etc. My point is, like I said above, The nature of street preaching is that you are trying to speak to people on their way to get the groceries, or meet a friend for lunch, ye know? So someone is walking down the street on route to their destination and as they approach some guy standing there on a box talking they start to hear what he is saying. When they are close enough they hear "And Jesus went into the temple" or "I want to talk to you about a man from a place called Nazareth" or something similar and they think "Oh he's talking about Christianity. I know of Christianity" and they keep walking.

Where as a guy standing up saying "Earlier today a man in Belgium through hand grenades into a crowd of people in a Christmas market", well people passing him will be more likely to stop, as this is something new to them.

The nature of the game means you are trying to talk to people who have not come to hear you talk, you have to hook people. I just don't think you can expect that to be as possible now as back in the time when Jesus had only recently been running around the place and Christianity was novel to a lot of people hearing it.

That's just my read on things in anyway.

I could be wrong though, that happened before this one time back in the 90's...

Doctor DooM

Other opinion (please elaborate)

The only five people who've said yes to the poll are all the people I would consider rather extreme as this forum goes. Did any of you actually come by your faith via a street preacher?

Because if the answer is no, you actually have the answer to your question right there Phil

philologos

No

Doctor DooM - As interesting as I find the revelation that you think that my beliefs would fall under the criterion of "extreme", the point of my posting this thread was simple. I've encountered street preaching here in London more than I would have encountered it growing up. I wouldn't endorse every single method of street preaching that I have ever come across either.

However, street preaching is a clear practice that occurred Biblically. Jesus Himself taught to crowds. This must tell us at the very least as Christians that it can be beneficial and that it can be useful.

My point was, how do Christians grapple with this Biblical reality? - Extreme or not extreme doesn't come into it. It is the core of Christianity that Jesus died to pay for the sins of the world, and that we might be forgiven by accepting Him as our Saviour. That's not really all that "radical" or "extreme" unless you're claiming that believing in the Gospel is extreme.

The reason I've asked this question isn't particularly because I'm desiring for atheists to chastise me according to whether or not they believe this to be wrong. I've asked it because I'm looking to see how other Christians generally understand it, or how Christians could understand it.

It's also not really a fair conclusion to state that because many haven't come to faith solely by hearing a street preacher that this somehow renders it useless. Rather I would see it as one mechanism amongst many for Christians to communicate the Gospel to wider society.

Doctor DooM

Other opinion (please elaborate)

philologos wrote: »

Doctor DooM - As interesting as I find the revelation that you think that my beliefs would fall under the criterion of "extreme", the point of my posting this thread was simple. I've encountered street preaching here in London more than I would have encountered it growing up. I wouldn't endorse every single method of street preaching that I have ever come across either.

However, street preaching is a clear practice that occurred Biblically. Jesus Himself taught to crowds. This must tell us at the very least as Christians that it can be beneficial and that it can be useful.

My point was, how do Christians grapple with this Biblical reality? - Extreme or not extreme doesn't come into it. It is the core of Christianity that Jesus died to pay for the sins of the world, and that we might be forgiven by accepting Him as our Saviour. That's not really all that "radical" or "extreme" unless you're claiming that believing in the Gospel is extreme.

The reason I've asked this question isn't particularly because I'm desiring for atheists to chastise me according to whether or not they believe this to be wrong. I've asked it because I'm looking to see how other Christians generally understand it, or how Christians could understand it.

It's also not really a fair conclusion to state that because many haven't come to faith solely by hearing a street preacher that this somehow renders it useless. Rather I would see it as one mechanism amongst many for Christians to communicate the Gospel to wider society.

Well, of the people who said yes, i would consider you the least extreme

Do you not honestly think it interesting though that the only people who seem to think it's of any use are those who already have absolutely no need to have the Gospel communicated to them? I'm going to leave it here as you just want Christian opinions but I as a non Christian would much rather spend my time looking it up on the interwebs than having it preached at me from a street corner, biblically approved or not.


I'm not chastising, btw, I thought you'd appreciate an honest answer. I really think there's better ways you could be reaching out to people than from a street corner, but as you know I have no compunction to agree with the Gospel, so yes I can see why there's an interesting discussion for the christianny types there.

*Bows out*

Lady Chuckles

I'm a little torn in this matter as well.

I wouldn't be a big fan of getting religion "shoved down my throat" by preachers in town ... you see, the more people nagging on about the same thing the more bored and annoyed I get; and then that, makes me lose what ever interest I might have had to begin with

However, it's not often I hear random preaching, at least not where I'm from ... and that has me thinking it would be marvellous to stop by and listen for a little. Get oneself thinking and re-valuing things

prinz

Other opinion (please elaborate)

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Do you not honestly think it interesting though that the only people who seem to think it's of any use are those who already have absolutely no need to have the Gospel communicated to them?

I don't think it's a fair conclusion. I voted no on the poll because I don't think the street preaching via the fire and brimstone from a microphone approach is particularly useful.

However 'street preaching' in other forms could be extremely useful.. information stands, leafletting, inviting people for a cup of tea, a digestive and a chat for example. Softly, softly, catchy monkey so to speak. If that was the poll I'd vote yes. I guess it depends on the preacher/type of preaching.

Zorbas

Other opinion (please elaborate)

There is now a lot less respect for religion in Ireland for obvious reasons. There are also a lot more people educated in other belief systems or in none and therefore street preaching is a much more difficult enterprise than say 20 / 30+ years ago when it was more popular.
So many people have been adversly affected and angered by religion that street preaching could easily pose a threat to public order. For this reason it should be a requirement that a street preacher should be licensed by his / her faith to ensure that noone makes things worse through an inability to respond approriately to the challenges which inevitable be experienced.

SonOfAdam

No

Doctor DooM wrote:

The only five people who've said yes to the poll are all the people I would consider rather extreme as this forum goes. Did any of you actually come by your faith via a street preacher?

Because if the answer is no, you actually have the answer to your question right there Phil

You may think that anyone who holds a christian belief is rather extreme but to answer the question I came to faith following an encounter with street evangelists. Apart from a nominally religious upbringing I had no other knowledge or interest in God and was happily going about my day one Saturday afternoon in town when something caught my interest. I found myself coming back to that end of the street on a few occassions that day and I heard the basics of the gospel. There had to be something more to it than a nutter blathering on about Jesus. Something was attracting me and once I got a taste of it I had to find out what that something was. Over the period of the following week I felt God pursuing me. It might seem odd to say but it was like the start of a new relationship where you're totally consumed by the other, unable to think of anything else, unable to eat etc., in other words, lovesick. That's what Jesus did that week , He captured my heart.

I now firmly believe that regardless of the sometimes awkward and blundering delivery of some evangelists/apologists there is power in the name of Jesus and in the gospel message. I have to remind myself of that when I sometimes cringe as I pass a preacher on the street.