I was reading a journal article, “Evangelism, Theology, and the Church” by Thorsten Prill (Evangelical Review of Theology, Vol. 29 No. 4 (2005) p. 303-330). It has several models of evangelism. I find it quite valuable. Here is a brief summary of these. I recommend reading the article to get a deeper look at this:
#1. Proclamation Model. Evangelism is proclaiming/preaching a message to be responded to. Frankly, if one takes a class in Evangelism, it will commonly assume that one is referring to this. It does seem to be a necessary component of evangelism (“faith cometh by hearing and hearing from the word of God”) but the focus on this above all others seems to me more about its metrics. An evangelist can measure how many people one has “shared the gospel with” (in terms of preaching) and one can measure how many respond in a specific way (saying a prayer, raising a hand, walking an aisle, etc.). The biggest problem is that none of the above responses is the goal of evangelism. The goal is to create disciples, not “responders.” This one lines up, generally, with “Truth Encounter”— conflict of ideas— since the message of the gospel is, in some sense, a set of ideas.
#2. Power Model. If the Proclamation Model lines up, generally with “Truth Encounter,” then the Power Model, unsurprisingly, lines up with “Power Encounter.” I do tend to find this one a bit annoying because of what I see as excesses in the Signs and Wonders movement. That being said, one of the ways in which the gospel is framed is in terms of spiritual warfare. Jesus “battled” the religious establishment in realm of ideas, but also appeared to battle Satan or demons in the intersection of the spiritual realm and the social (human) realm. The tendency of seeing spiritual power as a sign of how close we are to God rather than evidence of who God is, is to me a common problem with this model.
#3. Witness Model. On a certain level, this model just makes sense. Acts 1:8 says that the disciples of Jesus are to be witnesses of His. As we read Acts we see that this ‘being a witness’ is not simply understood in terms of what is said, but includes miraculous occurrences, and a whole list of behaviors. Essentially everything thing they do is supposed to be, in some sense, a witness to the veracity of the Kingdom of God. The holistic quality of this model is great. However, if everything is evangelism, then evangelism almost becomes a meaningless term. In missions, this would be seen in the shift (in the 1960s particularly) from a model of Proclamation to one of Presence.
#4. Social Action Model. We are called upon to be salt and light to the world, and are to live out the Kingdom of God, fulfilling in part the Abrahamic Covenant of being a blessing (or channel of God’s blessing) to all the world. There is much in the words of Jesus to make it clear that social action is important, and far too often churches and mission organizations have placed such a high regard for mental assent and church growth that their tangible impact on the community is lost. However, in itself, it is inadequate, and some proponents of this model end up downplaying or even rejecting proclamation of the gospel and conversion.
#5. Church Growth Model. This places the focus on growth of churches, particularly in numbers. It has the advantage of moving beyond the common metrics of the proclamation model of verbal assents or raised hands, towards incorporation in a church (baptisms, membership rolls, etc.). However, at its worst it can devolve again into a numbers game… and seeing things less in terms of Right and Wrong, and instead Works and Doesn’t Work.
#6. Initiation Model. This approach, rather new to me at least in its terminology, involves seeing evangelism in terms of initiating a person into the reign of God— God’s Kingdom. People are being developed not just to be converts, or to be church members, but members of God’s Kingdom, and participants in God’s work in the world. This one sounds interesting, but I I think I need to look into this one to understand it better. However, potentially at least, it honors the other five before it and sees them as valid aspects of the overall goal— Kingdom expansion.
Are there other models? I suppose so, but I am not sure how they might be viewed. I know in Orality missions, focus of evangelism is commonly involved in the sharing of Biblical, salvific, history. This, arguably, is just the Proclamation model— especially since somewhere in this history often a classic “plan of salvation” is shared. On the other hand, the sharing of salvific history is so far different than typical proclamation plans that it feels like it is something different. In fact, it could be seen as more like the Initiation model— much like part of the process of becoming a citizen of a country first involves becoming grounded in the history of that country (at least for some nations). Should group conversion be seen in some sense as a different model. The Church Growth model has roots in group conversion (through McGavran) but does that mean that it fits comfortably into that model?
Anyway, if you want to read Prill’s article online you can go to:
https://www.academia.edu/62252250/Evangelism_Theology_and_the_Church