As I close out my blog for the year (and decide when or if it comes back in '24), I'll address something that has interested me for a long time: Open-air preaching. This is any preaching/witnessing done outside of an environment typically designed for such (i.e. church, conferences, established missionary work, etc). Usually in a very public setting with the intent on reaching people who have never heard the Gospel. Admittedly, a personal definition for establishing a framework for my points.
Open-air preaching (OAP to simplify moving forward) is a wonderful thing to behold when done properly (with humility and concern for others). Not so much when it is done to primarily antagonize people (clearly the objective of many, but they would never admit that). While I'm a big fan of the zeal and the message of these people, many of their tactics leave one wondering. Are they really there to glorify God or themselves, are they motivated by love for others or pride, do they have a right understanding of Scripture? I'm not going to fall into their trap of claiming to know the hearts of others by claiming I know their motivation for yelling at people on the streets, but their actions seem to indicate their motives are less than righteous.
In the interest of total disclosure (and to show I'm not afraid to name names), when talking about those who don't get it right, I'm referring to OAPs such as Jesse Morrell, Kerrigan Skelly, and Ruben Israel (who died suddenly this past June). They mix orthodox biblical theology (for the most part, although sinless perfection seems to be one of their common Achilles heels) with unorthodox and unbiblical tactics. This is an easy conclusion when their tactics are held up against the fruits of the spirit we are commanded to embrace. You can also apply the reference point established by great evangelists such as Hudson Taylor, Amy Carmichael, and David Brainard, who worked with some of the most pagan populations on the planet; yet didn't call them derogatory names or make fun of their religion. In fact, they went to great extremes to show them love and respect (even adopting dress and customs when appropriate), without watering down the Gospel. Admittedly, these examples are the positive extreme, but that's better than the negative extreme exemplified by our modern-day OAPs.
Their negative tactics include amplification, name-calling, bad choice of location, and to a lesser degree; messages printed on signs and clothing. Personally, I'm not a fan of amplification (even used by people I admire), for two reasons: it's simply more noise in a world that is already too loud and if people are truly interested in your message, they'll come close enough to hear (remember the old saying, "...if you really want people to listen, whisper". It's similar to when we would have "stereo wars" in college. Different dorm rooms would crank up the speakers to see who could drown out who. It would just result in a din that nobody could understand (not that anyone actually did listen to the words in the 70's). It's just silly when these guys go to events that have loud music or similar (think Pride parades, festivals, etc.) and blast their message through a megaphone. Add to that people screaming at them or just yelling and celebrating in general and you end up with what sounds like (in a line from the 1951 movie Scrooge) "... an orchestra of scorched cats". All it does is elevate the volume of what is typically a confrontational situation. Even basic crisis intervention techniques promote deescalation, which often begins with bringing down the decibels in your voice (indoor voice, please!). This naturally leads to the second bad tactic: choice of venue. You don't have to be a Rhodes scholar to know showing up at a Pride event condemning homosexuals or yelling at people outside of a popular drinking establishment calling them hell-bound drunkards is not going to go well. Again, I agree with the content of their messages, just not the delivery system. I also think targeting these venues can be a good idea, but tact and compassion need to rule the day; not invective and argument. Work smarter, not dumber! Lastly, printed signs/clothes should follow the same rules of engagement (my one exception to this is as it pertains to abortion, as the goal is to stop the murder of an innocent child, so there is a lot more latitude).
The "canned" response by those employing these tactics is that if they didn't love people, they wouldn't be out there warning them of judgment. Maybe, maybe not. I personally feel some of these OAPs are more interested in views on their YouTube channel, than the feelings of others. However, I also feel that some of the OAPs are sincere in their concern for others, but obtuse to the counter-active nature of their approach. They often will justify the "mean" methods used (such as name calling) by citing the "name-calling" used by Jesus and Paul as it relates to the Pharisees and the Greeks on Mars Hill respectfully. What they fail to realize is that Jesus and Paul were dealing with sophisticated adults, not college students or generally ignorant people. The Pharisees were religious leaders, well prepared for theological battle (if not anxious). The same could be said for the philosophers in Greece. You could fairly assume their hearts were hardened by years of rejection of the truth. They were more interested in winning a debate than actually learning the Truth. I believe the same cannot be said for the average college student (or average lost person in general).
The last point as it relates to faulty open-air preaching has to do with Matthew 10:14, when Believers are told to leave anyplace that doesn't receive them. Throw in Proverbs 14:7 and there you go. There is a point where one has to cut bait. When people are throwing things at you, cussing you out, and generally expressing a strong desire for you to go away; that probably falls into the category of not receiving you. Maybe you should go. Go someplace else where maybe the Holy Spirit has prepared some hearts to receive the Good News. At least change your tactics. Most of these guys keep returning to the same places where they have had conflict and come expecting the same. They may even "prepare" with helmets, or goggles or people dedicated to provide "security". Sure can give the impression that one is stirring the pot intentionally.
The job of Christians is to share the Gospel and be ready to give reason for the faith within you. We just scatter seed for God to supply the increase. We're not to jam the seed into rocky ground and scream at it for not sprouting. These days open air preaching at its best is a very delicate situation that only a precious few are fit for. I believe Tony Miano and Ray Comfort are examples of guys that can pull it off. They go anywhere to any audience and don't back down from Christ alone, through faith alone. But they don't sink to the level of mean-spirited reprobates by name calling and relegating them to Hell, broad brush style. They don't define people only by how they look or what they say. They are willing to drill down to know their hearts. I've seen and heard Ruben, Jesse, and Kerrigan call girls whores due to tight fitting clothes, call people drunkards, if they're holding a beer, call men homos if they have long hair, and other examples. It's just idiotic. You don't have to be seeker sensitive in the colloquial sense in your approach to witnessing, but you certainly don't want to be seeker insensitive either.
