;)
The Challenge of Evangelism in Latin and South America
Posted by Guest Author in Bible & Theology, Church & Missions
Guest poster Stan Meador is an IMB colleague serving in Brazil. Today’s article has recently been circulated among a group of coworkers in Latin America, and received overwhelmingly affirming comments. We share Stan’s article here at sbcIMPACT! with the hope it may help you to better understand missionary ministry in Latin America, offer some important orientation information for those thinking of participating in mission trips to Latin America, and provide some good food for thought on evangelism in general.
The Challenge of Evangelism in Latin and South America
© 2009 By Donald Stanley Meador
When entering a country in which the majority of the people do not speak the language you speak, it is easy to assume that the greatest challenge to communicating the gospel will be overcoming the language barrier that exists between you and those to whom you have come to tell about Jesus. If only this were true. Over the course of the past five or six years, I have learned that this is not the case. The greatest challenge to evangelism in Latin and South America is not the different languages spoken in these regions. Language acquisition is only the first challenge one must overcome.
The greatest challenge to evangelism in Latin and South America, and perhaps in the whole world, is that evangelism, in the vocabulary of the English speaking church, has become something other than what we find in the New Testament.
In the New Testament, we find the proclamation of the Good News – to euaggelion – about Jesus Christ. During the expansion of the church in the Acts of the Apostles we find one fact about proclaiming the Good News that I believe has come to be overlooked by many in today’s practice of evangelism. When the Good News was proclaimed to Jewish audiences, the proclamation almost always begins with God’s covenant with Abraham. When the Good News was proclaimed to Gentile audiences, the proclamation began with God creating all that is. The fact is this – those proclaiming the Good News in the New Testament knew their audience’s beliefs and tailored the message so that their hearers could understand to which God they were referring, what He was doing in history, who Jesus was and what He came to do in relation to God’s purposes. The proclamation of the Good News started where the people were and built a foundation for them to truly understand why Jesus’ life, death and bodily resurrection were the Good News.
Somewhere in the course of church history, and I believe in the 20th Century, evangelism became a packaged sales deal. The first “canned approach” to evangelism that I learned was Evangelism Explosion. It was very well organized and very thorough. In its day, in the United States, I believe it was pretty good. Most people in the United States at that time had some foundational understanding of Scripture. Evangelism Explosion built on that foundation so that people could understand why Jesus’ life, death and resurrection were Good News.
In the United States, Bible classes were removed from public schools. People quit sending their children to Sunday School and Vacation Bible School. The basic foundational understanding of Scripture that Evangelism Explosion built upon diminished (and has virtually disappeared). Sadly, evangelism training has changed with the times. One would think that as the foundational understanding of Scripture decreased, evangelism training would change to include more foundational teachings of Scripture so that people could truly understand why Jesus’ life, death and resurrection were (and still are) the Good News. From what I have seen, the opposite is true. More recent evangelism training material has been simplified, reducing the amount of Scripture that is used to explain the Good News about Jesus to people who have almost no foundational knowledge of Scripture (if they have any at all). Thus, evangelism today has been reduced to little more than a “2 minute” personal testimony and five, or even ten, verses of Scripture, which are often presented outside of their Scriptural context.
Some may argue that the current evangelism methods used in U.S. churches are still effective there. I do not intend to argue that issue. My point is that while evangelism methods developed in the U.S. may be effective there, it is not necessarily true that they will be effective outside the U.S. When leaving the U.S. to evangelize in other countries and cultures, it is vital to understand the audience to whom the Good News will be proclaimed and what they believe. Only then can one proclaim the gospel in such a way that one’s hearers can understand why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are the Good News.
This brings us back to Latin and South America. There’s something about Mary and the saints in this region of the world that must be understood by any and all who plan to evangelize here. Within the Catholic faith as it is practiced in Latin and South America, especially in Brazil, Mary and the saints hold incredible sway over people. They are believed to be intercessors between the person and God. Many even hold Mary above Jesus (in practice) and almost equal to God the Father Himself. So, the question one must ask is this – Can a person become a follower of Jesus and at the same time remain a follower of Mary and the saints?
The Bible is clear that there is but one mediator between God and man – Jesus Christ (I Tim. 2:5). This is at least one part of why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are Good News. And, it is a relevant aspect of the gospel which must be explained to people who follow Mary and the saints. Those who believe that any other person can be the mediator, or one of the mediators, between God and man clearly do not understand the Good News about Jesus Christ. Therefore, any proclamation of the Good News in Latin and South America must include the fact that it is Christ alone who is the one mediator between God and man. You cannot be a follower of Mary and the saints and of Jesus Christ at the same time. The two are mutually exclusive. This fact is too often missing in evangelistic efforts in Latin and South America.
When people come to Latin and South America with evangelism in mind, they usually do not realize the role that prayer plays in these cultures. Every saint of the Catholic church has at least one prescribed prayer that adherents memorize and pray often. Mary has more prescribed prayers than I can count. For many, these prayers are prayed often, more often than daily. Some Catholics pray these prayers so often that they make the five prayers a day of Muslims look sparse. However, the prayers to the saints are prayed with an almost animistic approach. The underlying belief system is that the saints or Mary will act for the benefit of the person praying. In Latin and South America, prayers are used to get what one wants or to attain a benefit for the one praying or for someone they know. Many folks in this part of the world will pray just about any prayer that they believe will gain them a benefit.
That being the case, the “Sinner’s Prayer,” used in modern evangelism, is often viewed as a “get out of hell free” card. Just because a person in this part of the world prays a prayer does not mean that they have faith in Jesus, or even that they understand the Good News about Jesus. Generally speaking, if you ask someone here if they want to pray a specific prayer so they can go to heaven and not hell, they will want to pray that prayer. The problem is that they, more often than not, place their faith in the prayer rather than in Jesus. This proves to be very problematic, especially when the evangelizer proclaims that the one who prayed the Sinner’s Prayer is saved. The one who prayed that prayer walks away thinking they are saved because they prayed a prayer and the person who told them the words proclaimed them to be saved. It may be that the person, placing their faith in the prayer or in the foreigner, merely received a gospel inoculation.
In Roman Catholicism, people go and confess their sins to the priest and he proclaims them forgiven. Their “salvation” is proclaimed to be by the priest. So, when a “missionary,” one believed to have spiritual authority, proclaims the person saved simply because he or she prayed a certain prayer, the person believes they are saved because it was proclaimed to be so by the one esteemed to have spiritual authority.
My friend and colleague, Daniel, had a very sad experience about seven years ago. This experience went a long way toward solidifying in our minds the things I have written above. This is no mere illustration; it is a sad story of an event that did take place.
Some years ago, Daniel met a young man in South Brazil. When the young man learned that Daniel was a missionary, he unleashed a load of anger on Daniel for several minutes. During this time the young man told Daniel how “you evangelicals” had lied to him just like the Catholic Church because “You all said that if I prayed the prayer of the evangelicals my life would change, but I prayed that prayer and nothing changed! You are liars!” Most everyone reading this would agree that salvation is more than merely praying a prayer and that this young man did not understand what he was doing. Most everyone reading this would also agree that the present state of this young man is worse than before because he was unwilling to listen to anything that Daniel could say in response. Daniel was completely discredited in this young man’s mind because “you evangelicals” had lied to him about the “sinner’s prayer.”
In practical terms, most approaches to evangelism today have the Sinner’s Prayer as their goal. What many people who get trained in these methods of evangelism do not realize is that there is no example of someone being led to pray a “sinner’s prayer” in the Bible. Repentance is necessary, but no one was ever told what words to use to repent. When one is truly convicted of one’s sins, they will repent. David described this as having a broken and contrite heart (Psalm 51:17). Paul described it as having godly sorrow which leads to repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10). Luke described it as being pierced to the heart because of one’s sins (Acts 2:37). If our proclamation of the gospel does not result in the lost person reaching this state of awareness of his or her sins, no prayer will save him or her. The “sinner’s prayer” is not what saves a person. Faith and repentance of sin after the conviction of the Holy Spirit through hearing an understandable presentation of the gospel is what saves a person. This should be the goal of our gospel proclamation.
The “evangel” of evangelism simply means “good news”. When we evangelize we are about the task of good-newsing those who have not heard the good news about Jesus. So, just what is the good news about Jesus? Is the good news about Jesus the same for all people in all places? Yes and no. What Jesus accomplished and provided for us through His life, death and resurrection is good news for all people in all places. However, the way we present the Good News about Jesus to different people in different places will not be the same. As mentioned earlier, the New Testament records that the Gospel was present to the Jews in one way and to the Gentiles in another way. Why? They were different peoples with different backgrounds and religions. The earliest followers of Jesus knew that they had to proclaim the Good News about Jesus differently to different peoples if they were to understand why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus were Good News to those peoples.
Today, we, too, must proclaim the Good News about Jesus in different ways to different peoples. The goal of evangelism is still the same as it was in the New Testament. We want all people to understand why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus is Good News. Our error lies in the fact that we try to explain to others why the life, death and resurrection is good news to us, rather than getting to know them well enough that we can explain why the life, death and resurrection is good news for them. We should be about the task of presenting the good news about Jesus in a way that others can understand it. This is a very complicated task when one leaves one’s own language and culture. However, language is not the greatest difficulty to overcome.
Other cultures and religions have beliefs and practices that are barriers to our proclaiming the good news in a way that people within those religions and cultures can truly understand. There is only one way to discover those barriers. We must spend time with people within those religions and cultures and develop relationships through which we can understand how to present the good news in a way that they will understand.
In the New Testament, the good news was proclaimed based on the ideas that the hearers had about God or gods. Foundational facts about the One, True God were then presented. God’s interaction with mankind and Israel were presented as foundational truths necessary for the hearers to understand who God was and what He was doing throughout history. Only after these foundations were laid, do we see an explanation of why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus were good news for those hearing the evangel proclaimed.
After coming to understand one’s audience, one can better understand whether a one-time encounter presentation of the gospel is likely to make disciples in one’s own context. In Latin and South America such an approach to evangelism is not likely to actually make disciples.
The challenge we face in making disciples in Latin and South America is actually building the relationships that are necessary in order to lay a foundational understanding of Scripture that is sufficient for people to understand why the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are Good News. Anything less is not evangelism as we find in the New Testament.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;){kind=logo}
;)
;)
Obrigado por o artículo.
Relevance and understanding should be our goals in preaching the gospel. If we set our goals based on professions of faith or salvation prayers, we are denying the sovreignty of God by believing that we can save others. Just as John the Baptist was sent to “prepare the way for the Lord,” we too should be breaking down barriers to the Lord’s working in the lives of others.
Very insightful. Makes me wonder if the stories of preachers going to south america and speaking to large crowds and recording hundreds of “decisions” is actually hindering the kingdom rather than helping it?
A thought provoking concept, comparing the “sinners prayer” to the “prayers to Mary”……
Just because a person in this part of the world prays a prayer does not mean that they have faith in Jesus, or even that they understand the Good News about Jesus.
Indeed – and equally true in the U.S., in my experience. I’m not convinced that the “canned approaches” like EE were ever any more successful here than they are in Latin America. They produced large numbers of “decisions” without much lasting conversion of heart.
The slow, relationship-building approach to evangelism that you describe for Brazil is exactly what is needed here, too.
Culturally, as Americans, we have perfected the “3-step Prestomatic” approach to doing things. Sadly, I believe, this has infiltrated our evangelism methods as evangelicals as well. Most evangelistic methods such as EE, CWT, 4 Spiritual Laws, Faith, etc. are well motivated, and have been used by God. The basic thesis is that most people don’t share their faith because they don’t know how–so we need to give them an easy-to-learn model. However, in the process, some key elements of the gospel, such as salvation by grace instead of works, repentance, turning from idolatry, etc. have often been glossed over. In Europe (and even now in the States), I have found more and more that effective evangelism is better accomplished over a period of time, through a course, such as the Alpha Course, or Christianity Explained; or even better yet, through personal relationships and on-going dialogue. But, the problem is, that is not as simple as memorizing a 5 or 2-minute gospel presentation.
Also, as I see it, the “sinner’s prayer” occupies the same role today as baptism did in the NT (and probably should today). As Baptists, we are in agreement that baptism in and of itself does not save. We need to have clear that, by the same token, the “sinner’s prayer” in and of itself does not save. As long as we have that cleaer, though, we should be just as eager to lead people to biblical baptism as to praying the “sinner’s prayer.” But, in a lot of places (such as Latin America), it is a lot easier to get people to pray the “sinner’s prayer” than it is to get them to be baptized.
Brother Meador,
Thank you for steering us back in the right direction. Evangelism too often resembles “hunting” than it does “making disciples”. It seems some have been trained to hunt, bag the kill, and celebrate the notches on the belt,…leaving little room for glory to God.
Biblical discipleship make so much more sense and brings unity to the body of Christ.
Blessings,
Chris
Todd,
Yes, it could indeed be a hinderance. When you’re talking about people who, by and large:
* Already have some knowledge of and reverance for Jesus
* Already pray in some form somewhat regularly
* Don’t really think twice about syncretizing religions. (Sure, I’ll add Jesus to my animism, why not?)
* Wouldn’t want to offend their guest by NOT praying the prayer.
Thanks, David R. for the point about baptism.
Praying the sinner’s prayer does save you. It sure worked for the tax collector, we have Jesus‘ word on it (Luke 23:42-43). If you have been presented with the Gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), believe it, and you pray the sinner’s prayer or something similar, and mean it in your heart, you will be saved. It worked for me.
That does not mean you do not then need to begin your journey of discipleship. Salvation doesn’t end right there, it begins. And of course there will be those who pray the prayer, for whatever reason, and apparently were not sincere.
There is a danger of us making salvation too easy, but there is also a danger of making salvation too difficult.
I mostly agree with this article. Some of it is just a matter of semantics. I’m for the different plans of evangelism. They can be adapted to the culture or the individual situation. I grew up on the Roman Road presentation of the Gospel (Romans 3:23; 6:23; 5:8; 10:9-10, 13) , and it still works today. But of course it can be poorly presented.
If someone is ready to be saved, I lead them in a prayer such as,
“Dear Lord, I know that I’m a sinner, that I’ve done things that are wrong in Your eyes. I believe You love me and died on the cross for my sins. I believe You rose again and are living today. I ask You right now to forgive me of all my sins and to come into my heart and save me. Help me to make You the Lord, the Boss, of my life. Help me to live for you. In Jesus’ name, Amen.”
If a man that has heard and believes the Gospel prays that prayer, and means it in his heart, he will be saved. We have God’s Word on it.
David R. Brumbelow
Patrick,
About a year ago I was in the US for 6 months. I realized a few things during that time that really caught my attention about how church is done in the US as it relates to a post-modern world view.
I realized that most of the sermons I heard were largely illustrated with stories about people no one in the congregation actually knew, many of the stories were about things that took place decades, if not centuries ago. I heard very few stories in sermons about what God is doing today in the lives of the members of the church. It struck me that in these cases people seemed to be vicarious Christians. That is a stark contrast to the house churches that I am involved in here in Brazil. Almost every week people are talking about what God is doing in their lives and what God is teaching them. For the believers around me here, God is in the now. That is not the impression I got from most of the sermons I heard when I was in the US.
Now, post-modern folks are supposedly looking for real spirituality or religious experience. They are also not keen on institutionalized religion. Few, if any, accept that there is a universal authority.
I began to think about how to get a post modern to accept the authority of the Bible and where one would have to be to see that happen.
I realized it is not totally different than the issues of authority we face working with Catholics. You have to let the Bible establish its own authority – after all, it will not return void. Where would you have to be for that to take place with a post modern? Certainly not in a church building. It takes an investment of one’s life in the lives of others where they are willing to meet you.
Just my thoughts on the US reality. It will take investing one’s life to bring the Word of God, and thereby the gospel, where they will here, not necessarily where I am comfortable.
Thanks for you insight and comparison to the US reality.
Blessings – Stan Meador
As far as the sinner’s prayer is concerned, I view it as an outward expression of an inner conviction (like David Rogers was saying about Baptism). Take this example:
A Christian is witnessing to his non-Christian friend. As he shares the gospel, the friend is convicted of his sin and need for a savior. Realizing that he needs to put his trust in Christ for salvation, he inwardly puts his faith in Christ while they are talking (though he may not be able to verbalize it). Then his friend asks, “Are you ready to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior?” At that moment, a sedan jumps the curb and runs over the Christian and his friend. They both die. Does the man have a saving faith in Christ even though he hasn’t prayed anything? Yes!
Though I don’t think the Luke 23:42-43 counts as a prayer (since he was speaking to Jesus in the flesh), I think Patrick was trying to reference Luke 18:9-14. In that instance there is no suggestion that the prayer justified the man, but rather his repentance and faith.
Andrew,
I think you are refering to David Brumbelow’s post rather than Patrick’s. I checked the comments once earlier and only responded to Patrick, even though my response did not follow Patrick’s post.
The point I would offer in reference to the story of the Pharisee and the Publican is that no one gave the Publican the words of repentance that he prayed, except the Holy Spirit. In this story, the man needed no instruction in repentence – he realized that he was a sinner in need of grace/forgiveness and he humbled himself and asked for it in his own words.
I believe full well that repentence is necessary to salvation, but I do not find anyone in Scripture being told what to pray in repentence. Rather, when the conviction of the Holy Spirit is present repentence seems to come close on its heels.
Thanks for your comments. And, thanks to David Brumbelow too.
Blessings – Stan Meador
I guess we all get our references mixed up sometimes.
Even though I have nothing against simple Gospel presentations or the sinner’s prayer, Stan’s article is on to something! The tragedy of “missing the point” is exemplified in my own life. I grew up in Brazil as a missionary kid, returned as a missionary, but did not see this truth until my ninth year on the field. Prayers to Mary and the Saints are copied and published in every hole-in-the-wall copy shop in Brazil. There is a “prayer” to a saint for all occasions and in every circumstance. For a Brazilian to say the sinner’s prayer is not as significant as most of us Americans would care to admit. Todd was right . . . this does call into question the “soul winning success” that many have claimed in both South America and Africa. We have to laugh (so we don’t cry) over the fact that, based on the great success stories spread in the US, the populations of our two continents have been “won to the Lord” many times over.
Allow me to complicate matters . . . to make a point. Brazil is predominately animistic. While the Portuguese brought Africans to serve in bondage, the African slaves ultimately won! Their tribal religions hold Brazil in spiritual bondage. This religion (i.e. Candomble) is heralded as “Brazilian culture” by the most powerful media influencers and various levels of Brazilian government. It is extensively celebrated and fiercely guarded as our unique Brazilian heritage. Another irony is that the Roman Catholic Church in Brazil, which originally purposed rid the indigenous of their paganism, is today dominated by African paganism! It is difficult to find any Catholic cathedral or saint which does not have some vestige of African animism. It is impossible to separate Catholicism and animism in Brazil. There are numerous “Marys” and saints which are nothing less than “Christianized,” African, tribal gods. The tragedy in “Christianized Animism” is that Jesus is reduced to one more god, rather than the Supreme, All-Powerful, Sole and Sufficient Savior. As Stan points out, essential to true conversion is the turning from the “Marys” and “saints” to trust alone in the resurrected (the ultimate power confrontation) Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, this animistic mind set pervades even our Brazilian Christians as they seek “more power” from the Spirit. Since Jesus Christ is supreme, neopentecostalism booms in Brazil as the anti-dote to pagan animism. In most of its expressions in Brazil, neopentecostalism has reduced Christianity to another form of animism, and entices many believers to follow in its footsteps.
Now, to the point. I’m glad Stan’s article has hit the public forum, for we have an issue to settle. In our desperate desire for any success, we blindly turn to “best practices,” the latest denominational program, or the method used by that guy who is having success. The result is the tragedy we see in Brazil today—a “Christianized” country that remains animistic! No matter where we live, we must learn to engage the lost in their context rather than our context. What we often miss when we try to reproduce the latest greatest methodology is that the guy who is having success has usually learned to contextually engage the lost with the Gospel.
This religion (i.e. Candomble) is heralded as “Brazilian culture” by the most powerful media influencers and various levels of Brazilian government. It is extensively celebrated and fiercely guarded as our unique Brazilian heritage.
(Sigh) Folks, the exact same thing is happening here in the U.S. We just have different idols. Most of American Christianity is as culturally compromised as what we hear about in the Third World, but we refuse to recognize it.
If you don’t believe this, make a motion in your church’s next business meeting to remove the U.S. flag from the sanctuary. Ask your pastor not to recognize veterans on Veteran’s Day. And while you’re at it take an anonymous poll to see how many members watch American Idol and Desperate Housewives.