The Indigenous Principle

by J. W. Jepson, D.Min.

Life In Christ Center, 3095 Cherry Heights Road, The Dalles, Oregon 97058

THE BIBLICAL FUNCTION OF THE EVANGELIST

Of the ministry gifts (Ephesians 4:11), the one that is least understood and that suffers the most from both abuse and neglect is the evangelist. Instead of making a definitive study of the Biblical function of the evangelist, we have been content with general assumptions and the conclusions that follow from those assumptions. If a hundred Christians were asked, "What is an evangelist?", one would likely receive a hundred different answers.

A search through scores of books on evangelism written over the past one hundred years reveals a variety of assumptions about evangelists.

Many earlier writers considered evangelists to be outside of the "regular clergy," fervent but unschooled lay preachers not qualified to undertake the more serious work of the "settled ministry."

One has only to consider some of the outstanding American evangelists of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to see how deeply this idea was imbedded in many minds. Charles G. Finney had to struggle for ordination. D. L. Moody, the shoe salesman, never received ordination. Billy Sunday was considered to be primarily a converted baseball player.

If evangelistic crusades are built upon the celebrity value of a person’s name, the cynic might say that the least likely way to become a successful evangelist is to enter the ministry!

Some regard an evangelist as a messianic being who appears on the horizon once each generation. Others associate the term with sensational, even unethical, practices. A reflection of this is found in Baker’s Dictionary Of Practical Theology. There only one column is given to the evangelist, and most of that consists of warnings.³² It is true that many who have been labeled evangelists have brought the office into disrepute. But much of the problem is the result of the failure of the Church to provide adequately for the evangelist’s training, utilization and accountability.

The evangelist is commonly thought of as an independent preacher, ministering over radio and television through a para-church organization that is established and maintained by free-will offerings.

The fashion among contemporary writers on evangelism is to regard the evangelist as an anachronism with little or no relevance to modern church growth. Even a cursory examination of current evangelical literature reveals that almost without exception when the "vocational" evangelist is mentioned, the reference is pejorative.

Evangelism is no longer looked upon as the work of a few "professionals." It is every believer’s responsibility. It is not an occasional event, but an essential dimension of the on-going life of the Church. This is as it should be, of course. We are grateful to God for these maturing understandings.

Even when the evangelist is recognized, he is likely to be regarded as having a vaguely-defined ministry somewhere outside of the normal life of the church.

Thus the evangelist is looked upon generally as an irregular person with an irregular ministry, leading an irregular and unnatural life. So he tends to regard himself. Adopting a culturally and historically developed concept of his office, he struggles with a ministry in tension. He tries to fulfil his and others’ expectations, assuming them to be God’s expectations.

It is ironic that in many instances when the sponsoring pastors of a city-wide crusade select an evangelist, they call one who has built a name and a following through a multi-media ministry supported by direct fund appeals that by-pass the structure and leadership of the local church--the very thing that they disapprove. They capitalize on the name and fame of the evangelist, but are reluctant for that evangelist to appeal to their people for the funds necessary to keep his ministry before the public. They criticize evangelists for doing the very things that traditional attitudes and presuppositions pressure them into doing. Such is the tension when our ideas and practices are not clearly Biblical.

Evangelists who create para-church organizations can become the slaves of their own creatures. The pressure to pay the bills of an expanding "outreach ministry" and to keep the organizational machinery running can erode the spiritual vitality of their ministry. Administration replaces ministry. Mechanics replaces dynamics. The fact that "money follows ministry" has led more than one servant of God into troubled waters and some into shipwreck. Such are the dangers of building one’s ministry outside the church. The dangers are real enough inside the church, but they are much greater outside of it.

THE CHURCH AND THE MINISTRY.

In the context of the ecclesiological principles set forth in chapter one, we now consider the relationship of the evangelist to the church.

(1) God integrates every believer into a local church (1 Corinthians 12:18). (2) Every true minister of the gospel is a believer. Therefore, (3) every minister (including the evangelist) is a part of the local church. This is a valid syllogism and its logical conclusion is inescapable.

The general New Testament word for ministers is presbuteroi, translated "elders." A synonym is episcopoi, translated "bishops," or "overseers" (Acts 20:17,28; Philippians 1:1; 1 Peter 5:1-4). These are inherently terms of relationship--relationship to the church in its local, visible, corporate life and order.

Although elders are of one category essentially, they are of several kinds functionally. God gave "some, apostles; and some, prophets, and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers" (Ephesians 4:11, KJV). Essentially, these are all elders (overseers, bishops). Apostles are elders; prophets are elders; evangelists are elders; pastors and teachers are elders. But they have specific functions as members of the Body of Christ. Peter was an elder functioning as an apostle (1 Peter 5:1). So was John (2 John 1; 3 John 1).

So then, although not all elders are evangelists, all evangelists are elders. As such they are in relationship with the local church and function as an integral part of the local church.

Figure 1. Expanding functions of New Testament Elders.

The danger with any schematic is reading too much into it, or seeing something in it not intended by the author. This illustration is not intended to convey the idea of a hierarchy, of any one function being "higher" than another. It is intended to illustrate only an expanding breadth of kind of ministry. It would be understood better were it viewed horizontally (flat) rather than vertically.

In practice, some teachers might have and perhaps in fact do have in degree a more highly developed and prominent ministry than some evangelists, even though the function of the evangelist is in kind broader than that of the teacher.

We see the principle of expanding functional dimensions of ministry exemplified in Paul. He is included among the "prophets and teachers" at Antioch in Syria. (Acts 13:1). Certainly none would assert that when Paul’s ministry expanded to the functional dimension of an apostle that he surrendered his gifts of prophet and teacher. And one has only to read his epistles to look deeply into a pastor’s heart. Likewise, who could miss the trumpet-call of the evangelist in his preaching?

BIBLICAL DATA.

With these perspectives before us, we now examine what the Bible itself says about the evangelist.

The term is not found in the Septuagint or the other Greek versions of the Old Testament. Neither is it found in the Apostolic Fathers or in the Didache.³⁹

The noun "evangelist" is found only three times in the New Testament. In Acts 21:8 it is applied to Philip. In Ephesians 4:11 it is listed among the ministry gifts. In 2 Timothy 4:5 Paul exhorts Timothy to do the work of an evangelist.

We have no reason to doubt that some of these were evangelists.

Also, in 3 John 5-8 we read of some "brethren" and "strangers" who "went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles." Believers were exhorted to receive these peripatetics and thus be "fellowhelpers to the truth." Here we detect a development that seems to tie in with what was reported to be the situation in the second century, as we shall see. This is significant in view of the fact that John wrote toward the end of the first century. We notice that these evangelists (if indeed that is what they were) "went forth" to evangelize. That is, they evidently went out from a church and reported back to a church (verse 6).

The only example of an evangelist in the New Testament who was identified as such is Philip. A close examination of what is said about him and his ministry is important to our study.

In Acts 21:8 we read, "and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven" (KJV).

Acts chapter eight records Philip’s ministry in Samaria. His preaching was evangelistic and Christ-centered (verse 12). It was directed to the public (verse 5). The crowds paid attention to Philip’s message because they witnessed the miracles that he did (verses 6 and 13). These miracles included casting out demons and healing the palsied and lame (verse 7). The people believed and were baptized (verse 12). But the Holy Spirit had not fallen upon any of them (verse 16); this happened when Peter and John arrived, prayed, and laid hands on them (verses 15,17).

Also, Philip engaged in personal evangelism (verses 26-39). He was snatched away by the Holy Spirit, itinerated through the cities, and settled at Ceasarea (verse 40).

Philip had progressed from a deacon to an evangelist. This reminds us of 1 Timothy 3:13. The record of his ministry in Samaria leaves some unanswered questions. How long was he in Samaria? Where did he preach and how often? Before Peter and John arrived, what did Philip do, if anything, to organize the converts into a structured body?

References to Philip’s later life and ministry indicate that he settled in Caesarea and raised a family. Acts chapter 21 records that he lived in a house large enough to accommodate Paul and his group. Philip was there himself, and Paul and his party stayed with him "many days." The context informs us that Philip was in full fellowship with the church at Caesarea ("they of that place... certain of the disciples of Caesarea"). The picture is of an evangelist fully a part of the church at Caesarea receiving Paul and his company into his house and at the same time into contact with the church. That he is still referred to as an evangelist in Acts 21:8 implies that he continued to exercise that ministry.

From what The Scriptures teach concerning the vital relationship of every believer to the church, and from the record of the early believers’ practice of those teachings, can we come to any other conclusion than that Philip the evangelist was an elder of the church at Caesarea? If this is the correct conclusion, the New Testament presents a picture quite different from the image of an itinerant preacher without a home or a home church, who wears himself out in an unwholesome life-style while somewhere his family bravely endures his extended absence.

A productive evangelist will reach out beyond his community to preach the gospel, of course, but he will not detach himself from his home church.

Peter was an apostle who made extensive evangelistic tours (Acts 9:32); yet he kept close ties to the church at Jerusalem. As for Barnabas and Saul, the Holy Spirit directed the church at Antioch to set them apart for their mission. They did not just get up in church and say, "we feel led of the Lord to go," and then take off on their own. What God decreed the church commissioned. They went out from the church and they reported back to the church (Acts 14:26-28; 15:35).

In 2 Timothy 4:5 we find the third New Testament use of the noun, "evangelist." Paul exhorts Timothy to "do the work of an evangelist."

This raises a question. Was Timothy an evangelist, or did Paul exhort him to pursue the work of the evangelist as an auxiliary function? That is, is "do the work of an evangelist" equivalent to "be an evangelist"?

Timothy traveled extensively with Paul (Acts 16). In 1 Thessalonians 3:2 Paul refers to Timothy as "our fellowlaborer in the gospel of Christ." He called him "my workfellow" (Romans 16:21). He says concerning Timothy, "that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel" (Philippians 2:22 KJV). All of this is evidence that Timothy did a great deal of evangelistic preaching.

But was Timothy essentially an evangelist, or was he a New Testament prophet and thus a participant in foundational ministry (Ephesians 2:20)? We notice that after Timothy joined Paul’s party, "they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey" (Acts 16:14 NIV). The probability that Timothy was a prophet is reinforced by the fact that in many instances he was Paul’s personal and authoritative representative to the churches in matters of foundational nature and importance. (Acts 19:22; 1 Corinthians 4:17; Philippians 2:19,20).

From the Biblical data we see that Timothy’s ministry extended at least to the functional breadth of an evangelist. If that was the "front line" of his ministry, we would have to place him alongside of Philip as a New Testament evangelist. But if, as was more likely, he was a prophet, his evangelistic ministry was included within the scope of his function as a prophet, and we would so understand 2 Timothy 4:5. Thus doing the work of an evangelist at Ephesus (as no doubt he had done often in his travels with Paul) would be part of his total ministry, just as feeding the flock (1 Peter 5:2) is also part of the total ministry of the evangelist.

Were there other evangelists in the New Testament church? Probably. In 2 Corinthians 8:18-23 Paul refers to his traveling companions as "the messengers of the churches and the glory of Christ." Again, in Philippians 4:3 Paul alludes to his "fellowlaborers." It is likely that at least some of these were evangelists.

Biblical references to Apollos support the possibility that he was an evangelist. He traveled extensively, sometimes watering what Paul had planted (1 Corinthians 3:4-6; Titus 3:13). He was eloquent and "mighty in the Scriptures" (Acts 18:24), qualities that are certainly pertinent to the proclamation of the gospel.

In some respects this statement misses the mark. It also contains some valid insights.

Although the Didache does not mention evangelists by name, it does mention certain whom it terms "apostles" who were traveling among the churches. It is likely that these were evangelists. The churches were warned not to allow these itinerant preachers to settle among them, but to let them stay only a couple of days.⁴⁶ Perhaps we see here the seeds from which so many traditional attitudes toward evangelists have sprung.

On the other hand, these "apostles" were highly honored (Didache 4). They were referred to as "your high priests" (Didache 13). They were not to stay more than one day. But they were permitted to stay two days if necessary, and it was only if they stayed three days that they were to be considered as "false prophets" (Didache 11). They were not to prophesy that people should give them money.⁴⁷

Again, Eusebius is cited (H. E. 5. 10. 2.) as saying that in the second century there were "still many evangelists of the word eager to use their inspired zeal after the example of the apostles." See also H. E. 3. 37. 2.⁴⁸

Origen might have referred to evangelists in his day when he said that some made it "the business of their lives" to proclaim the gospel.⁴⁹

All of this is strong evidence that the function of the evangelist extended well into the second century. However, the evangelist seems to have been looked upon more and more as a mixed blessing to be regarded with suspicion. Evidently even then some who took the name contributed to the problem.

CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS.

As a believer, the evangelist is a member of the local church. As a minister, he is a member of its eldership.

In sub-apostolic times the evangelists were regarded as successors of the apostles. But as the Church became institutionalized, leadership was seen to reside more in formal offices than in spiritual functions. Thus the evangelist as such was choked out. He just did not fit into the ecclesiastical system that was evolving. This, of course, is not as it should be. The dynamic function of the evangelist must be maintained.

He must have a deep, abiding desire for the work, a desire that will lead him to read, to study, to learn all that he can about the message he is to proclaim, the methods he is to employ, and the spiritual resources he must have. There must develop in him a special God-given ability to point people to Christ. The love of Christ must constrain him so that his appeal is wooing, compassionate.⁵⁷

He must be always on his guard against the devices of Satan. The evangelist’s greatest temptations are, in order: pride, money, and women.⁵⁸

Satan opposes evangelism supremely; therefore, the evangelist can expect Satan to oppose him.⁵⁹

The evangelist by pastoral experience should know the organized Church and its departments, and should be a trained organizer.⁶⁰

Above all things, his personal spiritual preparation is the evangelist’s greatest requirement.⁶¹

Like his Master, the evangelist must be able to eat with sinners, to be at home with the rich and the poor, to relate to all classes and conditions, to bless and minister to the children.

Like every other minister, the evangelist must have a clear and well-defined understanding of himself and his ministry. Otherwise, he will find himself in the frame of mind described by P. T. Forsyth: whereas the ancient prophets responded to the Divine call, "Here am I!", so many of their modern counterparts speak out of confusion and frustration, "Where am I?"⁶⁴

An evangelist is an elder in the local church who is Divinely called and equipped to lead out in evangelism. He senses keenly and deeply the imperative of the constraining love of Christ toward the unconverted. The saving gospel is in his heart, his mind, and his mouth, and he cannot rest until he proclaim it.

He, too, is an under-shepherd, for like his Master he also seeks the lost sheep that they might be found and guided in the path of truth.

This is true whether the evangelist is leading his own local church in evangelism, "equipping the saints unto the work of ministering," or whether he stands before the multitudes proclaiming the gospel as a guest evangelist. What he is abroad must emerge from what he is at home.

The evangelist has specific God-given gifts and aptitudes for this ministry. For his ministry he needs specialized training.

When people enter Bible college or seminary with a call to be a pastor, missionary, minister of education, youth, and music, a full curriculum has been prepared for them. Faculty members trained in these fields of ministry are there to instruct them. Textbooks are on hand, and a full range of library resources are available to them.

But what happens when a young man arrives on campus and announces that God has called him to be an evangelist? Often they do not quite know what to do with him. He joins others in pursuing the basic ministerial curriculum. But where are his curriculum, faculty and textbooks? Is there a course on the function of the evangelist, or the philosophy and methodology of crusade evangelism? There are general courses on evangelism, and these are vital to him. But he needs highly specialized education in the specifics of his ministry.

Usually the young evangelist learns on his own, gaining what he can by reading about and observing other evangelists. He might stumble around for years, trying to formulate a methodology, struggling to achieve the status that will identify him as a successful evangelist. Thus he can easily gain the image of a free-lance operator.

In the process he might become discouraged and disillusioned. If he does "succeed," his star might rise only to plummet again because of a mis-judgment or an ethical or moral failure. If this happens, the Church will likely point to him as an example of how evangelism should not be conducted and what an evangelist should not be and do. Perhaps it also should ask: who trained him? did anyone provide him with the early direction and supervision that he so greatly needed?

God does raise up outstanding evangelists, of course, just as He raises up outstanding pastors and missionaries. But just as He also raises up a host of good pastors and missionaries who never become famous, He raises up good evangelists who never become famous. It is curious indeed that in our western culture the adjective "famous" has become a necessity the evangelist feels he must acquire to succeed. Why make demands of and put pressures on the office of the evangelist that we place on no other ministry? Like any other minister, the evangelist should be trained and utilized to his own potential under God. As the ministry of the evangelist is properly understood and recognized, they will be cultivated right along with other God-appointed ministries. That would be far better than waiting for them just to happen.

Usually the beginning evangelist’s impulse is to travel, to "go with the gospel." But if the principles espoused here are Biblically valid, this common pattern is the opposite of the right approach.

Instead of plunging early into an intensive crusade schedule, the young evangelist should first become fully integrated into the spiritual life and fellowship of the local church. He should join in its worship, participate in its edification, and synchronize his own evangelistic heart-beat with the pulse of the soul-winning life of the church, and it with his. Then as he learns how to work with the local church in effective evangelism, as his own gifts mature by exercise, as his understandings of the message he is to proclaim develop, as he grasps by study and experience the nature of the church and its vital role in every form of evangelism, he will be prepared to respond to invitations from the churches of other communities to crusades and other evangelistic endeavors. Like a tree, the trunk and limbs of his evangelistic outreach should grow as the roots of his ministry develop in his local church and community.

A young evangelist will have a ready-made opportunity to develop his preaching ministry in a smaller church. But he will also find himself involved in the details of pastoring a small congregation. He will have greater opportunity to concentrate on his evangelistic gifts if he joins the ministerial staff of a larger church, perhaps as a minister of evangelism. Thus he can give himself to equipping the saints in the area of his interest and specialization. But he will have to develop his own opportunities for preaching ministry because the pulpit will likely be occupied most of the time by the senior minister.

As he matures, he will likely not remain in an associate position. In fact, he will probably become the senior minister of an evangelistic church (or a church that will become evangelistic under his leadership). Some of the world’s great soul-winning churches are led by dynamic evangelists.

Among the elders of the churches there might be more true evangelists than we yet realize, yearning to be utilized to their full potential and praying earnestly that God will place them on the cutting edge of the mighty revival that we so desperately need.