Persuasion is not (necessarily) a dirty word

A few years back, I was talking to a cricketing friend about Christianity when another team mate interrupted us, mid-conversation, urging my friend, “Don’t listen to him! [i.e. me] It’s a trap!”

It’s no surprise that society is greatly suspicious of persuasion—particularly when the persuasion is directed against us. We don’t want to be taken in by the slick political spin doctor, the dodgy used car salesmen, the smooth-talking pick-up artist, or the fanatical religious proselytiser.

Furthermore, it’s not just non-believers who are suspicious of religious persuasion; Christians are too! We may have heard one too many stories about the manipulative practices adopted by tele-evangelists. More significantly, we may be familiar with Paul’s words:

For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified…my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. (1 Cor 2:2, 4-5)

As a result, we may decide to shun all efforts at evangelistic persuasion and resolve to ‘just proclaim the gospel’.

But does that mean we won’t bother praying about our gospel proclamation?

No, of course not! We’ll ‘just proclaim the gospel and pray’.

But does that mean we won’t bother living good lives to back up our evangelistic words?

No, of course not! Okay, well, we’ll ‘just proclaim the gospel, pray and seek to live good lives’.

Now, the gospel is the message of salvation: it truly is what God uses to call people into his kingdom. As I have argued in past pieces, the gospel is the message that Christians should understand and be able to explain.

But there are other things that should go with gospel proclamation—such as, prayer and living a good life. And there are other things that could usefully go with it. One of those things, I would argue, is persuasion.

Persuasion was certainly part of Paul’s repertoire. Consider, for example, Paul’s practice in Corinth as described in the Book of Acts: “And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks” (Acts 18:4; emphasis mine). Consider also Paul’s practice in Ephesus: “And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God” (Acts 19:8; emphasis mine).

If you want to see how Paul varied his presentation of the gospel message (i.e. not the gospel itself, but the way in which he presented it) in an effort to persuade people, simply compare his evangelistic speech to the Jewish audience in Pisidian Antioch in Acts 13 with his evangelistic speech to the Gentile audience in Athens in Acts 17.

Furthermore, consider Paul’s self-proclaimed approach in 1 Corinthians 9:

For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews…To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings. (1 Cor 9:19-20a, 22-23)

Paul clearly sought to persuade and was versatile in the way he did it.

While evangelistic persuasion may vary from situation to situation, there are some universals. It should at all times be ethical. It should be honest, and seek to highlight the truth and appeal of the gospel message. It must encourage a voluntary response. It should shun all forms of lies and deception. As Paul says in his second letter to the Corinthians, “But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word” (2 Cor 4:2). Paul shunned unethical forms of persuasion. On the contrary (he continues in the same verse), “But by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.”

In a future piece, I will highlight some of the methods of persuasion used and avoided by the New Testament evangelists. In the meantime, I simply want to argue that ethical persuasion in evangelism is a good thing: persuasion is not (necessarily) a dirty word.