Reading Reflection (1/19/09)

Just a few thoughts on what I've read so far, which really isn't much:

It's the first time I've heard of the E-1, E-2, and E-3 distinction, but I find it quite fascinating and probably useful as well. Although I'm looking to enter missions, my experience in the field is quite limited. It seems from the reading there are always strengths and weaknesses to debate when a focus on any of the types of evangelism is proposed. I agree, cross-cultural evangelism should not be neglected, but neither should E-1 evangelism. I appreciated Philip Hogan's response to Ralph Winter's article, because it put into perspective the order of business. The Holy Spirit is the main actor in evangelism, and may we never forget that. We can strategize, plan, and debate until the return of Christ, and still our labors will be in vain without the Holy Spirit. I feel also that while debate is stimulating, there will be no right answer. To those who promote E-2 and E-3 evangelism, those will always be the most neglected yet most important types of evangelism. Those who promote E-1 evangelism will say the same thing. Either way, as Dr. Winter makes clear, all types of evangelism are necessary and strategic. It is when one aspect is overemphasized that another is neglected. Thus, if the Holy Spirit is the main actor, and the Holy Spirit convicts workers to delve into a certain type of ministry, then we can rest assured that if all workers are faithful to their personal call, the work of evangelism will be balanced, strategic, and powerful. All components are necessary, and you can bet your fortune that the Holy Spirit will make sure all components are carried out for the furthering of the kingdom through the message of the gospel. Again, that is not to say that discussion is not important; rather, we must merely remember that it ultimately boils down to what God has called you and I as individuals to do. We are not responsible for the Holy Spirit's strategy, but we are responsible for our call.